Does Social Media Celebrate the “Narcissism of Similarity?”

Last June, Buzzfeed ran a piece entitled, ” People You Need to Unfriend on Facebook Immediately.”  In the post, the author suggests 1) signing into Facebook, 2) clicking links below various pop culture/political images, 3) seeing which of your friends has “liked” each of the pages, and 4) defriending these people.  Pages included in this exercise?  Nickleback, Guy Fieri, Two and a Half Men, Rush Limbaugh, Kim Kardashian, the Adam Sandler movie “Jack and Jill,” Dane Cook, and so on.

Adam Sandler, riding a jet ski all the way to a 3% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Source:

While Buzzfeed’s post can be tossed aside as a throwaway attempt at garnering laughs and page views, is it indicative of a shared attitude on the Internet?  Do we all self-select our peer group online to the point that we are eventually surrounded by like-minded others that share not only our political views, but also our favorite TV shows, taste in music, and seemingly random (read: bacon, kittens, 90s pop culture) favorite things in general?  And what if you disagree with one of the things that your friends all seem to love – do you feel the need to keep that to yourself?

In his landmark 1985 work, “Habits of the Heart,” sociologist Robert Bellah explores some societal issues that might provide some insight into how we interact online today.  Of particular interest for the topic at hand is the notion of “lifestyle enclaves” that is introduced within the work.  

“Lifestyle enclaves” refer to areas that people live in by choice and are centered around similarity.  In practice, this areas can be anything from a cul-de-sac in a neighborhood to a retirement community.  Lifestyle enclaves fit the needs of those who seek them out, as they position a person amongst others of similar characteristics, be it by measure of income, cultural interest, or another condition.  So what exactly distinguishes a lifestyle enclave from our typical notions of a community? In Bellah’s words,

Whereas a community attempts to be an inclusive whole, celebrating the interdependence of public and private life and the different callings of all, lifestyle is fundamentally segmental and celebrates the narcissism of similarity (emphasis mine). It usually explicitly involves a contrast with others who do not share one lifestyle. For this reason we speak not of lifestyle communities, though they are often called such in contemporary usage, but of lifestyle enclaves…The different, those with other lifestyles are not necessarily despised, they may be willingly tolerated, but they are irrelevant or even invisible in terms of one’s own lifestyle enclave.

Reading this passage, one can begin to wonder: How easy is it for us to think we are within a “genuine community” when we are really within a “lifestyle enclave?”  And how easy is it for us to take a step back and see which of these we are building when we are helping to develop a group?  These days, these questions must not only be addressed offline, but they must also be approached within the context of our social experiences online.

Calvin & Hobbes: If you want to be in my lifestyle enclave, you must appreciate it. Source:

In the digital sphere, as I’ve addressed earlier, we often serve as our own editors for the content that we receive.  The status updates that you see, the photos that are shared, the articles that are posted in your feed – it’s all because you decided to “friend” or “follow” an account (except, of course, for advertisements, but that’s another story).  So, when we log into our Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/etc. accounts, are we unwittingly part of a digital lifestyle enclave?

Lifestyle enclaves are by their very nature exclusive.  Due to the fact that they are centered around a particular interest (or set of interests), certain characteristics emerge: a language forms around the shared interest, certain abilities and pieces of knowledge are given value, and attempts by a member to show a difference in values or skills from the norms of the group are cause for conflict and exclusion.  Does this exist on the web?  If someone posts a view that you oppose online, do you tend to engage with that person, or do you exasperatedly ignore them?  If someone does not post any view, but does not go out of their way to support a view that you agree with, does that move them away from what you expect to see in your social media news feed? 

So, what is the impact of all of this if the general premise holds?  One might draw the conclusion that users draw themselves into somewhat of an echo chamber online that allows in one narrative and filters out disagreements.  Facebook, however, disagrees – a recent study of theirs contradicts some of this argument, although the debate is far from over.  It’s hard to read Bellah’s work in the modern context and not at least speculate that the social structures of the web perpetuate lifestyle enclaves just as it aids community-building.  As we learn to navigate the new digital tools in our lives, it is important for us to at least explore these questions to ensure that we aren’t moving forward blindly.  Gaining some broad understanding for how society reacts to and prepares for new avenues for communication will allow us at least properly contextualize the new opportunities and challenges on the horizon.


  1. Adam, Adam, Adam. I LOVE this. I was thinking about some of these same ideas during the past election and during the Supreme Court marriage equality cases. I also get concerned that this is happening for me. Am I being influenced by people with the same views as me just reinforcing my beliefs yet further instead of challenging them? I remember people used to make this argument (and still do) against Fox News when it first debuted. That conservatives can live in an entirely conservative spin zone that just seeks to reinforce their beliefs. (And I do think it does this.)

    I think this begs the question, however, is their an objective “view from nowhere?” A (relatively) neutral source for information? Or do we just throw that out the window and make sure we consume a variety of opinions?

    1. Thanks Paul! So- after what happened today, I decided to work on the readings for this week to try and take my mind off the news. In doing so, I realized that two of them in particular are very closely aligned with the general point of my post (The Daily We and the Pariser Thought Bubble TED Talk). Both worth checking out if you liked the blog.

      I think this issue has been swirling around in my head since conducting the first pilot interviews in qual, but it’s taken until writing this post for me to really sit down and articulate my general hunches.

      As for your questions: I’m not sure that there really is a “view from nowhere,” which is an issue discussed in a few of my other favorite soc works. However, I do think that one way to fight the absence of a singular source of neutral information is to be given many varying forms of accurate information (that is each slightly biased in a variety of ways). Sort of like a line of best fit for news. Pariser gets at this a bit in his talk within the context of constantly customizing browsers/search engines/other websites and the related dangers for society.

  2. kaitlinahern2013 · ·

    Interesting post! I wonder what role age plays in this debate. As teenagers, we are so easily influenced by our peers that we often act against our beliefs and values just to fit in. Later on in college, we are exposed to many new experiences and ideologies, helping us to really start shaping our own views. But at what point in life do we become so entrenched in our beliefs that we self-isolate into these reaffirming lifestyle enclaves, removed from differing opinions, beliefs, and values? It would be fascinating to see data on the subject and see if we could pinpoint at what age most people become unyielding in their views.

  3. Adam you stole my idea hahaha! I was trying to figure out how to weave a Calvin & Hobbs cartoon into my next post. Seriously I think this is a fascinating topic. I think the first step is for people to be able to recognize they are in a lifestyle enclave but then what is the next step for disrupting these enclaves in a way that is productive and encourages diversity of ideas and perspectives.

  4. Adam you stole my idea haha! I was trying to figure out how to weave a Calvin & Hobbs cartoon into my next blog posting. Seriously this is a great topic to discuss. I think that the first step is for individuals to recognize they are in these enclaves. But then what is the next step in disrupting the enclave in a way that is productive and encourages diversity of ideas and perspectives.

%d bloggers like this: