From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Rewrite needed[edit]

I have no idea what this is about.

I agree. I'm pretty sure this says approximately nothing. However, this is not really a wikipedia deficiency: pick up a book on "cyberculture" at your local bookstore and I guarantee you will find it hilarious. It might give you a little flavor of how the Native Americans felt when they read the nonsense white ethnographers had to say about their culture. --Delirium 05:21, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
Someone needs to insert something about actual cyber culture, i.e., real life and internet groups/communities that have an interest in technology and the way it influences society --MilkMiruku 15:12, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, this article looks like its just been copied/derived from here, which is quite a vague meander into nothing. The term does have an "explicit meaning", according to "The culture arising from the use of computer networks, as for communication, entertainment, work, and business." Shouldnt this article reflect this definition? -- jeffthejiff (talk) 08:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I've done a fairly thorough stylistic edit. Hopefully it is now a lot clearer, though there are still some things I don't understand (if I totally didn't understand something, I left it). I have not attempted to change the meaning in any significant way, though I've doubtless done so because the style and jargon used had a lot of assumptions built into it, and they have now largely gone.
I look forward to seeing what others do with this. Metamagician3000 10:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The difficulty that I fear the author is trying to embrace is that of 'Cyberculture' being somewhat of a blanket term. Perhaps a starting point would be to try and get a relatively comprehensive list of defined groups and provide a short summary of each, with relevant links... sort of an explain-by-example. As an example:

  • Hackers (Always the first to come to mind :P)
  • Forums
  • Wikis
  • Gamers (perhaps divided into Offline, Online (FPS style) and MMORPG?)
  • IRC (And other chat room equivalents)
  • IM systems (MSN, YahooIM, etc)
  • etc...

I can't bring any non-online defined groups that may count as cyberculture-related... perhaps the cybercafe culture? Is it still extant? Never really took off in my corner of the world. I realise most of these elements have their own entries, but I'm sure we can provide at least a simple summary under the umbrella of the term, as we are working with a virtual mothership, as it were.
Wrayth 13:41, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

This article seems to cover everything but cyberculture itself. (talk) 01:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

A Definition
"The culture arising from the use of computer networks, as for communication, entertainment, work, and business." - The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
"the culture that emerges from the use of computers for communication and entertainment and business" - WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
Wrayth 08:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

"However, what both the OED and the American Heritage Dictionary miss is that cyberculture is the culture within and among users of computer networks."

I don't think a random wiki editor should be second-guessing and dismissing two of the most accepted and respected dictionaries. (talk) 09:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Internet Culture[edit]

This article has nothing to do with Internet culture. Why does Internet culture redirect here? 10:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but I'm actually too lazy to do anything about it. Its because if anyone opposed it, they didn't speak out. Be bold. PotentialDanger (talk) 23:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I will try to improve this article to include more information on...well..the culture of the internet? thus making the redirect non-idiotic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanatherandom (talkcontribs) 19:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


Hi, I want to propose including reference to three American theorists N. Katherine Hayles, Donna Haraway and Sherry Turkle, whose research on the shifting balance from real to virtual as evidenced in Cyberculture is well documented. I believe this would ad depth to the description of the term and sit well alongside other key individuals and theories that are mentioned in the article already.

  • N. Katherine Hayles (1999),"How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics", Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL

Also, here is a link to her seminal essay "Virtual Bodies and Flickering Signifiers":

  • Donna Haraway (1991),"Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature", Routledge, New York, NY
  • Donna Haraway (1997),"Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan©Meets_OncoMouse™", Routledge, New York, NY

Here is a link to Haraway's "Cyborg Manifesto":

  • [1] retrieved February 4th 2009
  • Sherry Turkle (1997),"Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet", Simon & Schuster Inc, New York, NY

--Rbudegb (talk) 12:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Orlady (talk) 18:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

CybercultureInternet culture — "Internet culture" is the more common and accessible terminology. "Cyberculture" is more of a specialist piece of terminology, and is less commonly used in mainstream society. Relisted. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC) City of Destruction 23:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Support. I tend to agree; the first non-lead section even goes to lengths to point out that "cyberculture" as defined in dictionaries isn't quite what what the article is about. Powers T 00:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose. I feel this is a flaw in the scope of the article, not the scope of the title. The current overview section points out that the earlier definitions of the term included concepts like automation and the culture arising from such technological advances, while the focus on pure online culture is a latter development. 'Internet Culture', in contrast, is a much more specific term. I suppose I wouldn't oppose the move if we're careful to include a reference to the term 'Cyberculture' and how the term mutated? Wrayth (talk) 11:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I concur with Wrayth above. Internet culture ought to be a distinct article (for instance incorporating articles like netiquette). Cyberspace is another realm altogether. Skomorokh 14:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
    • I don't disagree that they should be separate articles, but it seems this one is more about "Internet culture" than "Cyberculture". Powers T 17:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

An overall phenomenon[edit]

I've started a section on the Internet Talk page bringing up the overall "collective force" phenomenon. Maybe you guys or anyone could comment on it and discuss the phenomenon? - M0rphzone (talk) 06:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Unnecessary "manifestation" example[edit]

Do we REALLY need the example of cybersex in this article? Does it obscure the reader's understanding of these manifestations if explicit content isn't mentioned?

Now, take this as more of an appeal than a demand. It just seems like unnecessary offense. I'm sure we can think of something other than cybersex as a replacement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:35, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Please read the policy Wikipedia is not censored. If it is a valid example, it should stay in the article. Further examples should, however, be listed. Any ideas? Dimadick (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

New Section suggestion - Effect on dialects, accents, and foreign cultures[edit]

This suggestion may veer strongly towards WP:OR, but I think that if someone can find articles or books that have already talked about this, it would not require Orginal Research. If such information exists, then I think that it would certainly be relevant to mention in this article.

I think that this is the correct story, link; I'd confirm for myself, but I can't access YouTube at the moment.

I recall an Australian News Story from some time around 2006 that covered video game "addiction", an Australian Teenager was playing World of Warcraft for an extended amount of time every day, to the point that it was seriously impacting his life. The story highlighted that whenever he would talk over VoIP, that he "lost" his accent. I don't recall the explanation that he gave, I think it had something to do with fitting in.

It might be valuable to cover this type of phenomena within the scope of this article. If anyone can cite similar cases of this happening across cultures, perhaps a Chinese player adopting a Korean accent, or vice versa? It would be interesting to know whether this is a growing trend among Net Culture across the world, and not just English speaking societies, and how common it is for citizens of one society to adopt another's; to see how deeply cultural exchange has cross pollinated onto other societies, while also highlighting the impact that Cyberculture has had on all societies in the process. I can certainly think of cases where governments have explicitly attempted to stop this kind of exposure to outside influence,[1] [2] [3] it seems likely that without those restrictions actively being enforced that this kind of exposure would occur naturally, and that the high availability of information online would increase the level of that exposure.

Think of something in the vein of Japanophile, anime fans that sometimes adopt the persona, memes, and mannerisms of fictional or historical characters, while living in a completely different culture. They are able to adopt an identity completely foreign from their native one, but are still able to identify to both. Sawta (talk) 16:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^
  2. ^
  3. ^