Evolving Empowerment in two Online Communities Collecting Memories of Amsterdam

In this paper we study and compare the evolvement of empowering and dis-empowering aspects of two local memory websites in Amsterdam currently active for more than a decade. The results partly fill a gap in the available... [ view full abstract ]

In this paper we study and compare the evolvement of empowering and dis-empowering aspects of two local memory websites in Amsterdam currently active for more than a decade. The results partly fill a gap in the available literature about this field, because the relation between collective empowerment and online behaviour in these communities has been underexposed. Departing from a narrative perspective on memories as resources for empowerment, we show how the online dynamics around these memories exhibit collective processes of identity formation, social learning and networking. However, in one case, certain patterns in the online dynamics uncover that, although the online activity is increasing, the diversity in the content and the number of participants are decreasing. This implies that this online community has become a small, empowered group, which at the same time has developed dis-empowering characteristics, i.e. limitations to include ‘other’ locals, neighbourhoods and topics. The other case, on the other hand, exhibits more stability in online activity, diversity in content and numbers of participation across the years. Comparing the organizational development of both local memory communities, we argue that the growth into a self-organizing community is the cause of increasing activity and decreasing participation in one of them. We illustrate how its current self-organization, unintentionally, fuels the decreasing diversity in content by a natural selection process of a rather homogeneous group of participants. In addition, the conviction in this case of what constitutes a successful online community is discussed for emphasizing individual empowerment and attracting empowered locals instead of vulnerable ones. The dependence on professionals and subsidies characterizing the organizational development of the other case is argued to explain its different collective behavior. In this community, the core group can be considered less empowered, but to its surrounding community it acts more empowering.