Tuesday, March 30, 2010

There's No Need For A Second Life

There’s No Need for Seconds

Second life offers users the ability to live vicariously through their online avatar. This offers just as many commercial opportunities as any other social medium although it often comes at a price. In the “Sims-Like” world of second life people must pay for the luxuries and amenities that they obtain. This capitalist idea not only makes for lots of money to be made, but those with the deepest pockets to be king. Levinson mentions in his New New Media book that things can be bought on Second Life including certain pieces of furniture that include sexual positions that can be done on them. If the real world didn’t have enough of a problem with aesthetics earned by money these problems would be much greater on second life.

In addition to people buying status in Second Life I think Second life defeats the purpose of social networking. The purpose of social networking is be able to communicate with those who you know when they are not around, but if you never see them it stops being social networking. When you never have physical contact with a friend it is no longer social networking, but antisocial networking.


  1. I don't think there needs to be a need for it to exist. I think Second Life is like a video game to people. And as more and more people are looking for realistic games, how more realistic does it get than another life with all the options? I'm not saying I agree with Second Life, but it's another attempt for people to escape reality.

  2. I think your phrase "antisocial networking" is a great way to describe it.

  3. I believe there are ways to send messages in Second Life, but your point about it not being as geared towards asynchronous communication as other social media is well taken.