Words, Words, Words

Lisa Nakamura has a lot to say about the website Goodreads in her article entitled: "Words with Friends": Socially Networked Reading with Goodreads. Despite the title of this post and the image to the right, I actually found her comments to be an interesting mixture of praise for the platform and concern about very real issues that arise from its use.

Goodreads as a platform is very interesting, to me. I suppose that the easiest way to describe it is "Like Facebook, but with less Face." Goodreads still suffers from a syndrome that we see in a lot of social media, which is the "me-centric" attitude that can easily grow there. When we are teenagers, we gain a concern that the entire world is paying attention to use and is super interested in finding our faults and beauty spots. I consider it a sport to go down to the mall and watch teenagers. If you watch carefully, you'll see that each of them is trying very hard to put on a particular display, and each of them is displaying so hard that few of them ever have the time to notice the displays being put on by their compatriots.

I think that most social networking platforms eventually lead to this inevitability, but with some more mature twists. It is still possible, however, to break down Goodreads users into some standard High School Movie character types.



Most people on Goodreads are "lurkers," meaning that they enjoy the content but post none of their own. There isn't anything inherently wrong with that. I fancy myself to be a lurker more than anything else, and rarely make online posts unless I'm feeling particularly passionate about a subject. Lurkers will often quietly rate books and add close friends who they will talk to over Facebook so that they can get easy book recommendations, and leave it at that. Lurkers are akin to your average High school student. They don't stand out, they don't make much of a name for themselves, but they develop close friendships with a small group of people and are happy with the experience overall. The upside is that they get exactly the experience they want out of Goodreads without much effort. The downside is that they often go unseen and unknown.

Just like High school, Goodreads has its Popular Kids. Now, in this case I don't mean the same kind of "Popular" as the Plastics of Mean Girls fame. I mean the ones who are legitimately well-liked by most people. These are those who give honest and delightful reviews, are quick to add friends of all sorts, and who do clever things that make them well-liked within what portions of the community they manage to communicate with. They are sociable, likable, and kind worded to those who are joining the community. They respect the reading choices of others and will often find themselves branching out into new avenues simply because it seems interesting. They try new things, and are likely to get the most possible out of the experience. The downside is that they must expend probably the most effort out of any of the three categories discussed here, and their eclectic choice of books may not make them seem like particularly skilled reviewers in certain circles.

And of course, Goodreads has its own Jocks and Cheerleaders. These are the kids who are prettier, more athletic, and just flat better. In words more suited to the context, they could be considered "Elitist" or "Snobby." Their reviews say things like "You can't consider yourself well-read unless you read this book" and proceed to parrot the general reviews that people have given of a book for a long time. They are very picky about what they read, and often become highly rated reviewers simply because they do it so much. They aren't in the community to enhance their own reading experience, but rather to show of their reading experience in a way that makes them feel good about themselves. Their focus is on distributing a lot of content, and making sure that everyone who visits their Goodreads page knows EXACTLY how well-read they are. There's nothing particularly evil or malicious about their intentions, but it will lead to different reactions. Some will be in awe of their reading portfolio and show them great respect. To a degree, they deserve it. It takes effort to be well-read and well-educated. Others will find themselves chafing against it.

All in all, I think that Goodreads is a great platform for what it does. I think that the social factor of a social network should definitely be explored, however. The group divisions explained above give us insight to the various kinds of users one can expect to find on a site like Goodreads, and the users you find can have a big impact on whether or not you find your experience with the platform to be beneficial or not. Social networks have a very strong human element that should always be considered, since it is the community of a site that will have the biggest influence on whether or not you stay. If everyone using Goodreads was rude and abusive to the new people trying to join, then very few people would use the service. Luckily, those individuals are a minuscule minority. The ways that people interact, and their ability to find the experience they want to have, is the key to a social network's survival, whether it be focused on reading or selfies.