whatknows's picture

Facebook Relationships and Information Architecture

By: Jed Brubaker

It is an age-old story. Boy/girl/* meets boy/girl/*, they go on a few dates, and all seems well. Then one of the two (or three?) brings up a daunting topic: the Facebook Relationship status. This was the case for a man I met during a recent visit to NYC. He had just begun a serious relationship, and everything seemed great from the outside, but he confessed some worry. It seems that the Facebook-based DTR had been less than successful. Thier Facebook statuses defiantly remained "Single" as trouble brewed in paradise.

Why is the Facebook status so important? The DTRs of the past (those between the individuals actually involved) have been replaced with relationship statuses on social networking sites, a virtual equivalent of wearing your beau's team jacket. But where the relationships of our youths could be discarded as easily as the physical emblems that ambiguously represented them, social networking sites eliminate any notion of ambiguity. Even Facebook's status of "it's complicated" seems to cover an ever narrowing range of experience.

If Facebook has a state diagram for relationships, they certainly don't do a good job of handling transitions from one state to another. De-statusing is the worst. Ashley Parker represents the situation nicely in her article published online in The Huffington Post. Here is a taste:

Sam and I broke up this past fall -- amicably and mutually -- and I was more or less doing fine. Then Sam sent me an email that said: "Just wanted to let you know that I changed my Facebook profile to incorporate our current status."

Removing a relationship status, inevitable as it is, has always seemed the equivalent of breaking up with someone, and then proceeding to contact everyone you know to let them know how intolerable the relationship was. Moreover, that person, whose status changed based on your actions alone, must now endure a plague of unrequested sympathy. This all because there is not a Facebook status for "No longer in a relationship but I was over him anyway, so no flowers, thank you."

And what about the budding relationship? What is the relationship status for "I really like him and am no longer actively looking, but don't want to jinx it"? This is certainly what was happening with our NYC couple. All the same, the importance of identifying the correct relationship status online caught me off gaurd. It seemed so compulsory that to not identify a relationship was to not be in a relationship at all. (Foucault's deployment of sexuality, anyone?)

Database design is the simple explanation for these limited relationship options. Relational databases are based on, well, the relationships between data. Custom or flexible relationships create a diverse set of complicated data that is, well, complicated. "Single" is a convenient database value if Facebook is going to start a dating service. "Engaged" is also incredibly instructive for advertisers in the wedding industry. Gone are the Facebook relationships that Alice Mathias memorializes when she writes of "one friend [who] announced her status as In a Relationship with Chinese Food." The profile of Chinese Food apparently featured a carry-out box and personal information that personified the cuisine of China.

Our NYC couple has since changed their statuses, but this seemingly momentous milestone is, at its roots, a construct of software. As the web becomes increasingly socialized, saturated with our personal information, now might be a good time to stop and remember that we define our relationships, not any website's limited information architecture. If statuses were to truely represent the real world, then the only honest status would be "it's complicated."


Jed Brubaker is a graduate student at CCT researching identity and technology. Read more at www.whatknows.com/blog

Trackback URL for this post:

http://www.gnovisjournal.org/trackback/180
whatknows's picture
nicole_guerra's picture

Why do I suddenly want diamonds?

Great post, Jed. Thanks for that.

I agree that Foucualt practically screams out at you while filling out these profiles, attempting to encompass your person within a handful of pre-ordained categories deemed to be important.

As you describe, by routinely including a Relationship category, an imposition is placed on the user which establishes the already presumed importance of romantic relationships to you, and to those looking at you. I found the ethnicity and sexual preference categories on Myspace even more presumptuous-- as if the devolution of that information is assumed to be necessary or relevant, never mind the range of options given.

I think the compulsory examination of the self, and one's relationships conferred by the structure of these forms definitely invoke, if not reaffirm normative conceptions of identity, like the traditional emphasis on coupling and the family unit.

Deciding whether to even utter the nature of a fledgling relationship in public, while explicitly defined categories such as Engaged, Single, and Married stare you in the face, can definitely be unsettling at least for a moment. I think these instances in which the subject is forced to negotiate with discourses of power in subtle and unexpected ways, in front of a captive audience, can be very powerful, which is demonstrated in the strong emotional response that status changes can elicit.

Facebook may as well send you an especially touching DeBeers advert with your sweetheart's face emblazoned on it immediately upon switching your status.

Nicole K. Guerra

This is why I always choose the "Whatever I can get" status

Although I am slightly embarrassed to admit it, I remember that when my long-time boyfriend and I broke up, I was devastated when I saw his MySpace status change from "In a Relationship" to "Single." To me, he might as well have been shouting from the rooftops, "I dumped her! I dumped her!" Yes, I realize this is quite an exaggeration, but I was fragile at the time.

People will inevitably read into every little change in your profile, be in a change in relationship status or even the lack of filling out the field at all. I recently found myself curiously wondering if the reason a friend had not filled out that field was because he was in one of these above situations where he wasn't sure where his relationship stood and didn't want to upset the other party with a potentially misleading status. And then I berated myself for prying into a part of his life he obviously wasn't willing to share.

Unfortunately, the very nature of social networking site profiles begs for users to misinterpret information. The obvious lack of explanation and cues allows the user, not the presenter, to determine the meaning. Which leads to any number of problems down the line for people. This is why I dictate my Facebook profile according to the maxim, "less information = less headaches." If my friends need to know my innermost details (or my favorite TV show), all they have to do is ask! Facebook should not be a gateway into your soul unless you fully accept that you will be dealing with the consequences for quite some time.
Syndicate content Subscribe to comments on this post