I think I'm pretty typical of people my age in that I've got an online presence that doesn't take too much digging to find. I'm on the usual collection of social networking sites - MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter among others.

And like most folks I hopped on the social networking train with the same general concept most people have - staying "connected."

But what does that really mean?

In theory we're all joining up to networks to stay in touch with our friends and family and find people we share interest with. (Or, to stalk from a safe online distance.) But these networks require a little work, it's never as simple as signing up and watching the connections be made. Sooner or later you have to ask yourself, how much do I care about this, and more importantly, what's the point of this?

Over at the New York Times, Clive Thompson tries to get to the heart of why we jump on, stay and share on these social networks. (I'll caution you, it's a great read, but at 6 pages it's lengthy web-wise.)

I think Thompson gets at a lot of questions in the article, mostly what's the point of these networks? How can people manage so many "friends?" What does it say about us that we share so much online?

One of the common questions with most social network sites is, who wants to know what you're doing all day? Thompson writes:

It's at least partially generational, as countless stories have lamented the fact that the kids are SHARING TOO MUCH online. But maybe it's because they see value in it. Sure there's the cult of personal celebrity that comes with it (how else can you explain waaaay to many incriminating party photos), but social networks can serve purposes, from personal - getting advice from friends and keeping up with things like birthdays, to the professional - finding and keeping up with people in your profession, people you want to work for, or keeping an eye on competition.

Thompson points out that in the world of Facebook, MySpace and Twitter, the sphere of "real friends" (people users actually know in the real world) is small, but the fringes of that sphere, where all the acquaintances, friends of friends and one-time contacts live, is just as useful.

So when I'm looking for people to help on a story, sending out a call for guest bloggers, or looking for a good Mexican restaurant in Portland, the network I've created around me can be useful.

But maintaining that online persona and holding on to those contacts takes work. A year ago I wrote about "social networking fatigue," the idea that there may be too many networks and too little time. Again, Thompson hits it on the head: "E-mail is something you have to stop to open and assess. It's personal; someone is asking for 100 percent of your attention. In contrast, ambient updates are all visible on one single page in a big row, and they're not really directed at you. This makes them skimmable, like newspaper headlines; maybe you'll read them all, maybe you'll skip some."

As to why we do all of this? It can be fun, entertaining and at times even a resource. But as social networking sites proliferate and young generations become more accustomed to living online, Thompson estimates there is a more immediate reason: If you don't, it could come back to haunt you. We all know the Internet can be a place where identity is easy manipulated and truth is hard to source at times. We also have the lessons of so many people who have been "Busted by the Internets" usually by their own doing.

The floodgates are already bursting, and with so many sources for information, Thompson offers a bit of a warning, or advice, depending on how you see it.

"If you don't dive in, other people will define who you are. So you constantly stream your pictures, your thoughts, your relationship status and what you're doing -- right now! -- if only to ensure the virtual version of you is accurate, or at least the one you want to present to the world."

["Brave New World of Digital Intimacy" - NYT]

(Thanks to NXT reader Jen for the link)

E-mail this entry to a friend