Voyeur, Lurker, or Sustained Silent Reader? How the Internet's "Chatter" Has Been Changing Definitions

For nineteen years I have been told that I am too quiet. Time and time again teachers have scolded me, informing me that my quietness hurts the productivity of the classroom; some have even gone so far as to call me selfish for keeping MY ideas to MYself. To be honest, I have never found my quietness, I suppose even my passivity, to be detrimental—yet I think it is interesting that I am often chastised for this very quality. I find that I am not the only one whose actions are examined under a critical lens—people who use the internet to simply visit blogs, websites, pages, and read conversations but do not contribute to the conversation, like myself, are harshly labeled as “lurkers” and “voyeurs.” I believe that these terms have become misused and no longer apply to readers who like to “quietly” drop by blogs. The internet has changed the way in which we view many things and how we categorize people. So, my question is not IF there is a better word for those who silently view blogs and other web pages, but how the internet has changed the meaning of words that we use to classify such individuals.

Voyeur is a harsh term, at least to me. It is primarily defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as: “A person whose sexual desires are stimulated or satisfied by covert observation of the sex organs or sexual activities of others. “ In this day and age the term voyeur is applied to a variety of things, particularly to internet users who follow or read blogs but do not comment. The term voyeur is also linked to the current use of lurker, defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as: “A person who reads communications to an electronic network without actively contributing.” However, the Oxford English Dictionary’s primary definition of lurk is “To hide oneself; to lie in ambush; to remain furtively or unobserved about one spot. Also, to live in concealment or retirement.”

Is something simiilar to this image what comes to mind when you are met with the word lurker or voyeur? This creepy depiction of a stranger hunched over a keyboard peering into the lives of complete strangers? Such a negative connotation for these two words has come from images such as this that plague today’s society. Yet, we live in a modern age where technology has opened up thousands of connection possibilities. For people such as bloggers, these connections have served as means to share ideas, exchange information, or to simply chat.

The internet has allowed the free sharing of personal information and thoughts to become commonplace. For those bloggers/ internet users who utilize this capability they understand (or dare I say should understand) that things published on the internet are often available to a vast number of strangers. Some bloggers resent individuals they deem “lurkers”— as if people who read blogs but do not comment are insulting the blogger by not adding their two cents to the conversation.

Yet, regarding the subject matter that surrounds questions of online participation, I have learned that the vast majority of online users are classified as lurkers. Shown by this pyramid provided by “Participation Inequality: Encouraging More Users To Contribute” 90% are lurkers, 9% intermittent contributors, and only 1% are heavy contributors.

These staggering statistics reinforce my claim that lurkers and voyeurs are a majority, not a minority characterized by sexual predation and hidden prying eyes. Many included in the 90% majority visit blogs and other online communities to observe as means of entertainment, possibly even as a way of satisfying some curiosity for what goes on in the lives of strangers. Stated by Bob Brown on Network World News: “Voyeurism has sort of emerged as a new entertainment category…that’s something the internet allows for on a global cultural scale.”

The incessant interest in others' lives has exploded since the creation of reality TV. Those who watch TV reality shows such as The Real World, Survivor, The Bachelor, aren’t labeled as lurkers and voyeurs. Some personal blogs are very similar to these reality shows: they contain personal information, thoughts, experiences, etc. So, why aren’t people who watch reality TV called lurkers and voyeurs? Aren’t their actions similar, if not identical, to those who read blogs but do not comment?

As an individual included in the 90% lurkers category I find that my desire to listen to conversations, whether written or vocal, is simply a reflection of my quiet nature. My quietness is not indicative of wanting to hide or conceal myself, I just do not believe in voicing my opinion unless it is productive. Some may disagree with me, claiming that any conversation is productive because it involves discussion and the sharing of ideas (even those that aren’t fully formed). Paul Grobstein says it perfectly in his blog­ The "How" of Story Sharing I :” People in our culture (all cultures) are frequently reluctant to talk unless they think they have something ‘big’ or ‘unassailable’ to say.” While recognizing this cultural phenomena, Grobstein also elaborates on his belief that change/progress comes from “chatter.”

Focusing on more of Paul Grobstein’s work on Serendip, he casts a seemingly different light on the question of lurkers and voyeurs as compared to other bloggers.  He states, “there is as much value in listening as in speaking.” Without judging these quiet readers (or labeling them as lurkers/ voyeurs) Paul tries to urge us quiet ones to speak. : “A story is valuable for what it might contribute.”

I believe that this lesson, despite being widespread, and despite many bloggers begging for comments, is unmoving to sustained silent readers. This is exactly what I believe we should call people who read online postings without response, who observe without rendering any public judgment—sustained silent readers.

It is a better depiction of these sorts of people as opposed to lurkers or voyeurs. Using again Grobstein’s belief in chatter, the terms voyeur and lurker have morphed into rather different nouns than they originally were. Their use has grown to include both criminals and normal people, and I believe that the “chatter” of the internet and its blogs and online communities is the reason.

In today’s internet age a voyeur is no longer only a sick minded criminal. A voyeur can be a middle aged woman reading another mother’s blog or a fifteen year old girl checking up on her friend’s Facebook profile.  A lurker no longer simply defines individuals who conceal themselves, but depicts a young man following a friend’s travel blog. The difference between the negative connotation of lurker and voyeur and the actual use creates a discrepancy between what the word means and what the word is actually describing.

In short, would you call the woman in this image a lurker or a voyeur with respect to their actual meaning? I find it hard to justify that she is in fact either of these two words (with regard to their original definitions)—showcasing how  the internet has not only skewed the terminology that its users use, but moreover how the internet has created a “chatter” enacting change that has altered the social expectations and qualifications for the use of words like voyeur and lurker. I am a sustained silent reader—not to be confused with a lurker or a voyeur.

Brown, Bob. "Voyeurism and the Future of Internet Video." Network World. N.p., Feb.

2007. Web. 17 Feb. 2010.

 <http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/020807-brightcove-internet-video-future-and-voyeurism.html>.

Grobstein, Paul. "To Blog or Not to Blog." Serendip. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Aug. 2007. 

Grobstein, Paul. "The "How" of Story Sharing I." Serendip. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Aug. 2004.

"Lurker." Oxford English Dictionary. Online ed. n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2010.

Nielsen, Jakob. "Participation Inequality: Encouraging More Users to Contribute."

Alertbox. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Oct. 2006. <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_inequality.html>.

"Voyeur." Oxford English Dictionary Online. 2010. Web. 18 Feb. 2010.