I examined a specific website as the focus of my media ethnography. http://www.whenshtf.com/ is a website dedicated to preparation and survival in emergencies. “SHTF” is an acronym referring to “sh!t hitting the fan” and is a general catch-all term for civil unrest, natural disasters, riots, breakdowns in infrastructure, or – of course – the biggie, TEOTWAKI: “The End of the World as We Know It.” (I got linked into the site from an outdoors/hunting/fishing/camping website which I frequent; I must admit, some of the stuff is highly entertaining and interesting!) The site is mainly comprised of men, and most of their preparation is done in anticipation of some sort of short-term collapse of society. Many of the members of the site are Southern, Gulf Coast residents. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were life-changing events for many of these site contributors. Others are Midwestern residents who have been variously concerned with flooding or tornadoes or ice storms. A few big city dwellers worry about the possibility of riots. Of course, in this recession, economic issues and emergencies are frequently discussed. By and large, most of the members are middle-aged white men.
The social purpose of the website/forum is discussion of various preparations for anticipated disruptive events. The members exchange information, ideas, photographs, and anecdotes about their experiences. Often members will also meet in “real life” for camping trips or “bug-outs” (hiking and camping trips wherein they test their gear). Their social agenda is highly politicized: survivalists are strongly libertarian in their views, and pride themselves on self-sufficiency. They view anyone who disregards the possibility of SHTF as being “sheep” or “sheeple” (Sheep/people). The most commonly shared stance is one of self sufficiency and a general mistrust of any sort of “authority” in an emergency.
Within the social interaction of the on-line communication, authority within the forum is derived from “experience.” Members who provide first hand, real world discussion of actual emergencies are held up as the leaders or moral authority of the discussion board. Law enforcement officers, emergency personnel, former and current military personnel, and people who have BTDT (been there, done that) are generally expected to be treated with respect. Of course, verisimilitude is necessary. Since this is on the Internet, any story which seems fabricated or manufactured will immediately be met with calls of “BS” and “Troll”. That being said, it is seldom that anyone asks for any sort of documentation of expertise or experience.
More authority tends to be given to rural residents, rather than urban residents. All members/contributors to the forum are treated with respect, as long as they share the viewpoint that in an emergency, it is important to be self-sufficient. Any sort of expectation of government assistance is anathema to the general mindset of the website. Also, the membership of the website is not surprisingly pro-gun. Any sort of support of gun control is roundly discouraged.
The most popular threads seem to be the ones displaying pictures of the various preparations or “preps” made by the various members. It was surprising to me how the various members would disagree on what is necessary; most seem to think that a supply of non-perishable food, a sturdy vehicle, and a family emergency plan are a suitable set of preparations. However, great authority is given to the forum members who have gone above and beyond these (in my mind) practical steps, and into a world of bunkers, ammunition stockpiles, vast quantities of food, and various BOL (bug out locations). Apparently, the most basic belief is that you can never be TOO prepared.
The construction of meaning of the text within this group is fascinating. They are constantly writing and re-writing their own text, and the authors who support, amplify, or expand the basic philosophical underpinnings of self-sufficiency are held as the moral authority of the on-line community. Those with real-world experience or who provide documentation (photographic, especially) are held up as teachers or wise men. Resistance from the group is also easily identified; anyone who suggests that these members are paranoid or overly imaginative is instantly faced with multiple arguments or is treated as if he or she is simply too foolish for words.
The social purpose of the website/forum is discussion of various preparations for anticipated disruptive events. The members exchange information, ideas, photographs, and anecdotes about their experiences. Often members will also meet in “real life” for camping trips or “bug-outs” (hiking and camping trips wherein they test their gear). Their social agenda is highly politicized: survivalists are strongly libertarian in their views, and pride themselves on self-sufficiency. They view anyone who disregards the possibility of SHTF as being “sheep” or “sheeple” (Sheep/people). The most commonly shared stance is one of self sufficiency and a general mistrust of any sort of “authority” in an emergency.
Within the social interaction of the on-line communication, authority within the forum is derived from “experience.” Members who provide first hand, real world discussion of actual emergencies are held up as the leaders or moral authority of the discussion board. Law enforcement officers, emergency personnel, former and current military personnel, and people who have BTDT (been there, done that) are generally expected to be treated with respect. Of course, verisimilitude is necessary. Since this is on the Internet, any story which seems fabricated or manufactured will immediately be met with calls of “BS” and “Troll”. That being said, it is seldom that anyone asks for any sort of documentation of expertise or experience.
More authority tends to be given to rural residents, rather than urban residents. All members/contributors to the forum are treated with respect, as long as they share the viewpoint that in an emergency, it is important to be self-sufficient. Any sort of expectation of government assistance is anathema to the general mindset of the website. Also, the membership of the website is not surprisingly pro-gun. Any sort of support of gun control is roundly discouraged.
The most popular threads seem to be the ones displaying pictures of the various preparations or “preps” made by the various members. It was surprising to me how the various members would disagree on what is necessary; most seem to think that a supply of non-perishable food, a sturdy vehicle, and a family emergency plan are a suitable set of preparations. However, great authority is given to the forum members who have gone above and beyond these (in my mind) practical steps, and into a world of bunkers, ammunition stockpiles, vast quantities of food, and various BOL (bug out locations). Apparently, the most basic belief is that you can never be TOO prepared.
The construction of meaning of the text within this group is fascinating. They are constantly writing and re-writing their own text, and the authors who support, amplify, or expand the basic philosophical underpinnings of self-sufficiency are held as the moral authority of the on-line community. Those with real-world experience or who provide documentation (photographic, especially) are held up as teachers or wise men. Resistance from the group is also easily identified; anyone who suggests that these members are paranoid or overly imaginative is instantly faced with multiple arguments or is treated as if he or she is simply too foolish for words.
No comments:
Post a Comment