Communicating Post-Falls

From an examination of the 2010 focus group data, mobile phones were the most common mechanism for collecting contact details of people who were ‘bumped into’. No phone signal or ability to charge phones meant limited ability to collect numbers. Fekeisha (focus group fourteen 2010) experienced this “because we don’t have phones here … I can’t give them my number so … ‘I’ve got you on Facebook so I’ll message you later’”. It was an asset to Fekeisha that she utilised the communication tools of Facebook. The ability to source and/or tap into networks on social media appeared to play a big role in strengthening bonds.

Ninety-six percent of respondents to the 2010 esurvey claimed to have communicated with people that they had met at the Falls in the approximately two months post-Falls (Q12 2010). In asking how they had communicated with people that they already knew before the Falls, respondents communicated predominantly

55

through face-to-face communications (83%), mobile phone texting (78%), social media (69%) and mobile phone calling (68%) (Q13 2010 – see Table 4). These results were similar to the question discussed earlier relating to the forms of communication that were used on a daily basis (Q9 2010 – see Table 3).

Exploring more deeply, thirty-eight percent used social media, twenty-nine percent conversed face-to-face, twenty-six percent used mobile phone texting and eleven percent used mobile phone calling as the dominant forms of communication used to communicate with people who they had met at the Festival since the event (see Table 4). Although only eleven percent had conversed with six or more new friends (Q14 2010), the use of social media and mobile phone texting as the top forms of technology to do this offers an interesting insight into how people build new friendships in the twenty-first century.

People I knew before The

Falls People I met at The Falls Face-to-face 316 (82.9%) 112 (29.4%) Mail/fax 26 (6.8%) 1 (0.3%) Home phone (calling) 101 (26.5%) 4 (1.0%) Mobile phone (calling) 260 (68.2%) 40 (10.5%) Mobile phone (texting) 297 (78.0%) 99 (26.0%) Email 192 (50.4%) 36 (9.4%) Social media 262 (68.8%) 146 (38.3%) Instant messaging 28 (7.3%) 12 (3.1%) Chat rooms 8 (2.1%) 2 (0.5%) Forums 15 (3.9%) 6 (1.6%) Video conferencing 29 (7.6%) 6 (1.6%)

Table 4 – I have communicated with people (Q13 2010)

Facebook was specifically mentioned in eleven separate focus groups, Twitter once and MySpace once in relation to communication post-Falls. Facebook was mentioned in seven of the 2011 interviews and Google+, a relatively new social media platform at that time, was mentioned once. In an interview with Paul (interview eleven 2011), Facebook, as a key platform for continued social engagement between use of the space, was discussed:

Paul – Facebook is a big one … you don’t talk to people, umm, say on Facebook. Like you wouldn’t ring somebody up that you talk to on Facebook or anything like that so, umm, so that’s certainly the … best way of keeping acquaintances. Like to me an acquaintance is someone you can just talk to on Facebook and that sort of stuff but you wouldn’t give them a buzz ‘n say “How you going mate? Want to go out for tea or go to a movie or something?”, so yeah … regardless of how well you know the person you can still sort of add them as a friend and then get to know them or whatever … you’ve got a name … especially if you don’t really know them that well … one thing will lead to another there and everything expands then … so it’s a pretty powerful source of media … Last year I helped this bloke who got the piss beaten out of him and, umm, I actually met him again in here this year. I was talking to him on Facebook … added him on Facebook and we had a beer here not long ago.

Researcher – But if it wasn’t for the Falls you wouldn’t have met up with him again?

Paul – That’s right, yeah.

Participants regularly pointed to using social media and text messaging as softer options for making friends and the ongoing servicing of the friendships. An example of this was “you can meet someone and, if you know their name, you could probably find them on Facebook, whereas texting you actually have to do the whole mobile number thing” (John – focus group thirteen 2010). James (focus group five 2010) continued this line of servicing new friendships when he said that “we’ll probably find out his [another attendee’s] last name and Facebook him and we’ll become friends on Facebook”. Jackie (focus group thirteen 2010) also advised, “On Facebook you can ‘like’ one of their [another attendee’s] photos or ‘like’ a comment. That’s, you know, social, whereas it’s not sort of making an effort.” Murray (focus group thirteen 2010) simply expressed that Facebook is “more casual. It’s just taken off.”

Walter (focus group eight 2010) described in more depth the ability to keep in touch through social media:

With the use of Facebook now it’s easier to do that [communicate with people you have met]. I met a few people here from College and football and stuff … I’d probably even ask them to be my friend on Facebook … I would [add them as a Facebook friend] … it’s just that I haven’t seen them for five, six, seven years and … it’s a really good chat, memories I suppose … now it’s easy to catch up and keep in touch with people.