LiveJournal |
LiveJournal (often abbreviated LJ) is the name of a weblog site allowing Internet users to keep an online journal or diary. It is also the name of the open source server Software that was designed to run it. LiveJournal s differences from other blogging sites include its WELL-like features of a self-contained community and some social networking features similar to Friendster.
LiveJournal was started in 1999 by Brad Fitzpatrick as a way of keeping his high school friends updated on his activities. In January 2005, blogging software company Six Apart purchased Danga Interactive, the company owned by Fitzpatrick which operates LiveJournal.
=Features=
A number of features distinguish LiveJournal from other blog sites, one of which is the Friends Page, a list of the most recent posts from people a user has added to their Friends List (sometimes shortened to flist ) — turning LiveJournal into a community of interconnected weblogs, and shifting it toward being social network software. Another such distinguishing feature is the employment of the S2 programming language template system to allow users to customize the appearance and behaviour of their weblogs.
Similar to other online services, users may upload a small graphical icon, referred to as userpic or icon by LiveJournal users, by which to define one s self to the rest of the community (this user picture functions as the user s Avatar (virtual reality)). This optional small image may take a maximum viewing size of 100 by 100 pixels. LiveJournal s free users, which account for approximately 98% of the network, have a limit of 3 interchangeable icons. Paid account holders, which account for 1.6% of the network, may have up to fifteen, and can pay optional fees to get a total of one hundred user picture slots.
The selected user icon will, if present, appear next to posts on individual user pages, and on the Friends Pages of other users who have friended them. The user s default icon will also appear prominently on the user s main journal page.
Each user also has a User Info page, which is used to describe personal interests. It can contain a variety of data including contact information, a biography, images (linked from off-site sources), and lists of friends, interests, and communities to which the user belongs.
=Community=
==Demographics==
As of late September 2005, over 8 million accounts had been created, of which almost 1.5 million had been updated at some point in the last 30 days [http://www.livejournal.com/stats.bml]. Of those users who provided their date of birth, the vast majority were in the 15-23 age group. Of those who specified a gender, more than two thirds were female. This is notable because most internet media are dominated by males.
LiveJournal is most popular in English language-speaking countries (although there is a language selection feature), and the United States has by far the most LiveJournal users among users who choose to list a location. There is also a sizable Russia contingent, as many Russians have turned to LiveJournal as their primary blogging engine. The following are rounded figures as of late September 2005 (based on the information listed by the users):
The following is a breakdown of United States users, by state, as of late September 2005
==User interaction==
As with most weblogs, people can comment on each other s journal entries and create a internet forum-style thread of comments — each comment can be replied to individually, starting a new thread. All users, including non-paying users, can set various options for comments: they can instruct the software to only accept comments from those on their Friends list (commonly referred to as a flist or f-list ) or block anonymous comments (meaning only LiveJournal users can comment on their posts), cause new comments to be screened (that is, hidden until approved by the author of the entry), or not allow commenting at all. The user has the additional option to have replies sent directly to their registered e-mail address.
In addition, LiveJournal acts as host to group discussion boards, or communities, encompassing a myriad of subjects. (For example, there is a community dealing specifically with Wikipedia [http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikipedians/].) Each community has one or more maintainers who have access to the options and settings of the community account.
Some areas of LiveJournal rely heavily on user contributions and volunteer efforts [http://www.livejournal.com/site/contributors.bml]. In particular, the LiveJournal Support area is run almost entirely by unpaid volunteers. Similarly, the website is translated into other languages by volunteers, although this effort is continually degrading due to widespread frustration. Many attribute this frustration to a certain lack of involvement of LiveJournal s management in issues and problems.
The development of the LiveJournal software has seen extensive volunteer involvement in the past. In February 2003 and March 2003, there was even an effort, nicknamed the Bazaar , to boost volunteer performance by offering money in return for wanted enhancements or improvements [http://www.livejournal.com/community/lj_dev/493562.html]. The Bazaar was intended to follow a regular monthly pay-out scheme, but it ended up paying out only once, after which it was neglected without a word from the management until about one year later when it was shut down.
Nowadays, voluntary contributions to the software are considered for inclusion less and less as the company has acquired more and more paid employees who focus on the organization s commercial interests. This has led to the formation of several Fork (software), many of which introduce new features that users would like to see at LiveJournal, especially features that are brought up repeatedly in LiveJournal s own [http://www.livejournal.com/community/suggestions suggestions] journal (which is sometimes stereotyped to be superfluous because many regular readers feel that LiveJournal has stopped caring about ideas from users and implement only the development team s own ideas, particularly since the buyout by Six Apart).
In some cases legal and administrative concerns have led LiveJournal to prohibit some people from volunteering.
==Notable users and journals==
Certain LiveJournals have become famous throughout the years for their especially interesting content, including political commentary and anecdotal advice on subjects ranging from household care to aquariums, or because they belong to otherwise famous or accomplished people, including many well-known writers, graphic artists, mass media personalities, programmers, etc.
Other LiveJournals have instead gained notoriety for the infamy of their owners. See, for example, *the LiveJournal of for the alleged murder of her mother; her journal s final entry mentions her mother s death. *the LiveJournal of John Dallas Lockhart, username [http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bmluser=ohbutyouwillpet ohbutyouwillpet] , a 36-year-old lawyer who fled Ohio as he was about to be charged by the state with multiple counts of child molestation involving a four-month-old infant *the LiveJournal of .
The instances of LiveJournal having a wider impact on the outside world include
Controversial or dramatic LiveJournal entries can quickly attract thousands of comments, as users are quickly alerted to noteworthy posts by the robust social network, or external sites such as Encyclopædia Dramatica or LJ Drama, which categorize and link to them.
==Frank the Goat==
Frank the Goat is LiveJournal s mascot. Frank is treated like an actual living being by much of the LiveJournal userbase, and his brief [http://www.livejournal.com/site/goat.bml biography ] as well as his [http://www.livejournal.com/users/frank journal ] reflect this.
Sometimes, callers to LiveJournal s PhonePost service are informed Frank the Goat appreciates your call. This occurs randomly [http://www.livejournal.com/users/news/75379.htmlthread=10040435#t10040435].
=Social networking=
The unit of social networking on LiveJournal is binary (with only two possible states of connection between one user and another) and one-directional. Each user chooses a list of users they list as friends .
The term friend on LiveJournal is mostly a technical term; however, because the term friend is emotionally loaded for many people, there have been discussions in such LiveJournal communities as [http://www.livejournal.com/community/lj_dev lj_dev] and [http://www.livejournal.com/community/lj_biz lj_biz] , as well as [http://www.livejournal.com/community/suggestions suggestions] about whether the term should be used in this way; this conflict is discussed in greater detail below.
A user s list of friends (a.k.a. flist ) will often include several communities and RSS (protocol) feeds in addition to individual users. Generally, friending allows the friends of a user to read protected entries and causes the friends entries to appear on the user s friends page . Friends can also be grouped together in friends groups , allowing for more complex behavior in both of these features.
The dual usage of friend as those one reads and those one trusts doesn t necessarily match the definition of the word used in everyday speech. Even the individual users on a user s friends list may contain a mixture of people met through real world friendships, online friendships, general interest, and courtesy (a user friending back someone who friended them). Sometimes a friends list represents something entirely unrelated to social relationships, such as a reading list, a collection, a puzzle, or something random with no social significance whatsoever.
The fact that friend is used, without qualification, to describe vastly different things in the LiveJournal community is sometimes a source of conflict, hurt feelings, and other misunderstandings. This is intensified by the fact that friending and defriending (adding or removing another user from your Friends list) is as simple as clicking a button, while real life friendships are formed and unmade over longer periods of time. Since the friend concept on LiveJournal is unidirectional, any user can friend any other user. Many users are sensitive to being listed as a friend of a controversial user or someone whom they actively dislike. To combat this, a ban facility was created for users to hide others who have listed them as a friend [http://www.livejournal.com/support/faqbrowse.bmlfaqid=185].
On April Fool s Day, 2004, the Livejournal staff pulled a prank on all users by changing the terms friend and friend of to stalking and stalked by. Though many users wanted to keep these terms, it caused controversy, particularly with those who had been victims of stalking. [http://www.livejournal.com/users/news/77588.html]
Despite these problems, the word friend continues to be used to define these multi-faceted relationships on LiveJournal. This possibly reflects the designers intent to have LiveJournal become more like an off-line community than some other purely on-line organizational structure.
=Controversies=
==Invite system==
From September 2, 2001 until December 12, 2003, the growth of LiveJournal was put under control by an invite code system. This was because the number of users was increasing faster than the server architecture could handle. New users needed to either obtain an invite code from an existing user or buy a paid account (which reverts to a free account at the expiration of the period of time paid for). The invite code system also had the side effect of helping to prevent abuse by deterring people from creating multiple throw-away accounts. The invite code system was lifted after a number of major improvements to the overall site architecture.
The removal of the invite code system was met with mixed feelings and a surprisingly large amount of opposition. A number of users felt the invite code system gave LiveJournal a touch of elitism, or a closed-community feel. Others, including LiveJournal s management, pointed out that when first introduced, the invite code system was intended to be temporary.
==Abuse team decisions==
As LiveJournal has grown, it has had to deal with issues involving the content it hosts. Like most web logging hosts, it has adopted a basic , and other issues.
The abuse team at LiveJournal has frequently come under criticism for their handling of alleged violations. Many users felt the abuse team over-reacted to cases in disregard of the actual Terms of Service (or the reverse, that it disregards blatant Terms of Service violations). A small controversy arose in November 2004 when a policy document used by the abuse team was leaked to a group of its critics before it was due to be released. Comparisons between the policy and the Terms of Service were inevitable, with some feeling that the former were more restrictive than the latter, and others believing that the Terms of Service are very wide in scope and encompass everything within the policy document. The policy document has since been officially released [http://www.livejournal.com/abuse/policy.bml], as it had been intended to be.
A small number of users who have been affected by abuse team policies have made the decision to abandon LiveJournal in favor of other blogging sites, though the number of such users is very small compared to LiveJournal s total user-base. It has, however, exacerbated the opinion held by some that LiveJournal is a fine host for teenage diary and social networking but cannot be a platform for serious web journaling. Others feel that the abuse team is performing a worthwhile job, banning only those with ill intentions and histories of clear Terms of Service violations. In their opinion LiveJournal is a viable choice for serious web publishing, so long as one does not wish to cause trouble.
=Sale to Six Apart=
LiveJournal s parent company, Danga Interactive, was initially formed and held entirely by Fitzpatrick. However, as LiveJournal s popularity gained, Fitzpatrick was approached by many others to sell the popular journaling service. He initially resisted many of these offers, not wanting his pet project (which he has characterized as his baby ) in the hands of those who did not understand the site s core principles--reliance on paid memberships to fund site operations, the absence of advertising, the volunteer support model, and LiveJournal s support of the free software movement. Nonetheless, as the administrative aspect of LiveJournal began to consume more of Fitzpatrick s time, which he would have rather spent working on the site s technical workings, he began to take the acquisition offers more seriously.
Finally, Fitzpatrick was approached by Ben Trott and Mena Trott, co-founders of Six Apart, who gained his trust and seemed to understand LiveJournal s core principles. He felt that a sale to Six Apart would allow him to focus on technical aspects of the site, while Six Apart s usability and design expertise could improve LiveJournal. Six Apart was interested in buying Danga and LiveJournal to complement their other blogging products.
==Community reaction==
Rumors of Danga s impending sale to Six Apart were first reported by their journals to impact the site s performance.[http://www.livejournal.com/community/lj_maintenance/99736.html] A few hours later, Fitzpatrick confirmed the sale, and insisted the site s core principles would not be discarded by the new ownership.[http://www.livejournal.com/users/news/82926.html] He also stressed that he and other Danga employees would still continue to manage LiveJournal and that he had determined that Six Apart was committed to the site s core principles before selling.
While the userbase was generally supportive of Fitzpatrick s decision, a few have questioned the deal, objecting to Six Apart s sale of proprietary software, or objecting to changes in LiveJournal s Guiding Principles document [http://www.livejournal.com/users/fuzzie/133601.html]. In addition, some users had developed a trust of Fitzpatrick, but felt that the sale of Danga to an outside company meant that Fitzpatrick was not ultimately in control of the site.
Fitzpatrick s supporters offered rebuttals to many of these arguments.[http://www.livejournal.com/users/evan/769381.html] They noted that the bulk of the code running LiveJournal at the time of the acquisition would continue to be open source, as it was licensed under the GNU General Public License. Furthermore, it was noted, most of the changes to the Social Contract / Guiding Principles document were minor rewordings to prevent legal problems. (The document was never a binding legal contract.)
Others argued that Fitzpatrick, as the sole owner of Danga Interactive, had every right to sell the site, without first consulting the users.
Finally, Fitzpatrick himself noted he was growing tired of the administrative aspects of the site — to the point where he had contemplated shutting down the service — and I knew I would ve shut down the site on my own if I didn t get help. [http://www.livejournal.com/users/evan/769381.htmlthread=4897125#t4897125]
=Other sites running the LiveJournal engine=
The software running LiveJournal is open source and primarily written in Perl. Because of this, many other communities have been designed using the LiveJournal software. However, with the exception of DeadJournal and GreatestJournal, these tend to be unstable and short-lived. An example of this is the August 2004 closing of uJournal, which temporarily left approximately 100,000 accounts without hosting before the content was moved to AboutMyLife.
=LiveJournal timeline=
=See also=
*LJ Drama, site that details and satirizes events within the LiveJournal community
=External links=
*[http://www.livejournal.com/ LiveJournal.com] *[http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/LiveJournal a series of articles] on Encyclopædia Dramatica both critical and satirical of LiveJournal *[http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/int_liv_use LiveJournal users by country] *[http://www.exposedbrain.com/archives/hyperfriends.pdf Hyperfriendship: An Ethnographic Account of Friendship Amongst LiveJournal Users], one blogger s research (in Portable Document Format)
=Media attention=
*[http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfmid=1035134.1035162 Structure and Evolution of Blogspace], a December 2004 analysis of LiveJournal, published in the Communications of the ACM *[http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/4057606.htm Journals might be gaining ground], a September 2002 article from the San Jose Mercury News *[http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf/base/front_page/110510304755450.xml Young Web whiz blogs his way to a bundle], a January 2005 article on the sale of LiveJournal from The Oregonian *[http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf/base/front_page/1105707864184260.xml Youth craft new world on Web site], a January 2005 article on the impact of getting more news from online sources such as LiveJournal instead of mass media, written for The Oregonian *[http://www.livejournal.com/tools/memories.bmluser=bookmarklj&keyword=SUPPORT:+OVERALL:+Changes+in+Support&filter=all Detailed Changes in Support], from LiveJournal.com *[http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_12/raynes/ Pulling sense out of today’s informational chaos: LiveJournal as a site of knowledge creation and sharing], from First Monday|
|