Interpersonal Communication- A Mindful Approach to Relationships, 2020a

countries, and the same is also true of many young people in the United States who are radicalized
through the Internet into hate groups here. The Internet is a fantastic tool, but the types of information
that it can expose an adolescent to during their formative years can send them on a prosocial or antisocial
path. Thankfully, there is hope. As Erikson said, “There is no reason to insist that a technological
world, as such, need weaken inner resources of adaptation, which may, in fact, be replenished by the
goodwill and ingenuity of a communicating species.” 43 Although many forces try to sway adolescents
towards anti-social behavior and ideologies, technology isn’t inherently bad for identity formation.
Technology can also be used to help forge positive identities.
We just discussed how an individual’s identity could be shaped by her/his/their interaction with
technology, but what about the identity we display when we’re online. In the earliest days of the Internet,
it was common for people to be completely anonymous on the Internet (more on this shortly). For our
purposes, it’s important to realize that people often present themselves differently in CMC contexts. For
example, someone chatting with a complete stranger on Tinder but completely differently when texting
with her/his/their mother.
Erving Goffman, in his book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, was the first to note that when
interacting with others, people tend to guide or control the presentation of themselves to the other
person. 44 As people, we can alter how we look (to a degree), how we behave, and how we communicate,
and all of these will impact the perception that someone builds of us during an interaction. And while
we’re attempting to create an impression of ourselves, the other person is also attempting to create a
perception of who you are as a person.
In an ideal world, we hope how we’re presenting ourselves will be how the other person interprets
this self-presentation, but it doesn’t always work out that way. Goffman coined the term dramaturgical
analysis to describe this type of interactive sensemaking because he saw the faces people put on when
interacting with others as similar to the roles actors play onstage. In this respect, Goffman used the
term “front stage” to the types of behavior we exhibit when we know others are watching us (e.g., an
interpersonal interaction). “Backstage” then is the behavior we engage in when we have no audience
present, so we are free from the rules and norms of interaction that govern our day-to-day interactions
with others. Basically, when we are alone, we can let our hair down and relax by getting out of the
character we perform on stage. At the same time, we also prepare for future interactions on stage while
we’re backstage. For example, maybe a woman will practice a pick up line she plans on using in a bar
after work, or a man will rehearse what he’s going to say when he meets his boyfriend’s parents at dinner
that night.
Erving Goffman died in 1982 well before the birth of the WWW and the Internet as most of us know
it today, so he didn’t write about the issue of online identities. Syed Murtaza Alfarid Hussain applied
Goffman’s dramaturgical approach to Facebook. 45 Alfarid Hussain argues that Facebook can be seen as
part of the “front stage” for interaction where we perform our identities. As such, Facebook “provides the
opportunity for individuals to use props such as user profile information, photo posting/sharing/tagging,
status updates, ‘Like’ and ‘Unlike’ others posts, comments or wall posts, profile image/cover page image,
online befriending, group/community membership, weblinks and security and privacy settings.” 46 If
you’re like us, maybe you sat in front of your smartphone, tablet computer, laptop, or desktop computer
Interpersonal Communication 428