The importance of the offline world

Another unexpected finding was that, for a couple of participants, social media was not necessarily regarded as a good thing; in fact, they perceived that their lives would be better without it. It seemed that they felt that, to some extent, social media had replaced real life face-to-face contact, particularly in their lives in Norway, and this was a cause of sadness and regret. However, for other participants social media was a way to connect with people - to make or establish new friendships, or to connect with others who had similar experiences, in an online space - and it facilitated friendships that transcended into the offline world.

Nevertheless, whilst social media certainly had value for most participants in the study in this way, and could supplement the limited opportunities that they had to meet people in Norway, it did not replace ‗real life‘ connection and communication.

In the field of health promotion, studies show that there is interest among refugees in

Internet-based communication, including social media, for receiving health information, but that other methods of communication are still desired. Use and preference for digital

technologies may vary across different groups. For example, a study exploring the

preferences of newly arrived migrant and refugee women for obtaining health information in Australia found that refugee women preferred information talks and ethnic radio to web-based information, which was the preferred method of migrant women (Lee, Sulaiman-Hill,

79

& Thompson, 2013). O‘Mara (2013) has used the example of Sudanese refugees, who have more of an oral than written tradition, to contrast with Samoan migrants, who are well networked, to propose a hybrid approach to using social media for health promotion with culturally and linguistically diverse communities which integrates ‗online‘ and ‗offline‘

participation. In order to understand the potential of digital technologies and social media to improve health outcomes, it would seem essential to understand how and why different populations, including different refugee populations, use and relate to them. This moves the discussion beyond a focus on universal access to ICTs and social media, towards why people use them and what they want and are able to achieve with them.

7.5.3 „Active‟ versus „passive‟ use of social media

A striking aspect of the findings of this study was the different ways in which individual participants approached and interacted with social media in their everyday lives. This is illustrated most clearly in the cases of Nasim and Omar. Nasim proactively used the

‗Refugees Welcome to Norway‘ Facebook group to ask for help – initially with learning Norwegian, but also to answer his questions about integration and Norwegian culture, to receive emotional support, and eventually to crowdfund school fees. His life changed

radically as a result of his Facebook use: from being isolated in a remote transit camp with no opportunity to meet locals or learn Norwegian, to speaking Norwegian, making Norwegian friends (some of whom he perceived as ―family‖), and being able to attend school. His approach to social media was that it was a tool to help solve his problems as a refugee in Norway:

For me, I just try to think of solutions. “Ok, it‟s a problem, how can I solve it? What can I do? How should I...” Because it‟s about making opportunities, it‟s about making solutions. Facebook, for me, it‟s a way of showing people who I am and what I can do. (Nasim)

Omar, on the other hand, viewed social media with suspicion. He valued it for

communicating with his family and friends overseas, but he did not trust it as a source of information; he did not look at ‗Refugees Welcome‘ groups because he felt that the people (mostly Norwegians) participating in them were overly ―optimistic‖; and he was careful about sharing his personal information. ―People put too much private information on social media. I don‟t like that idea actually, because my private life is mine‖ (Omar). He stated that social media was not important to him; and, other than communicating with family and

80 friends, it did not seem that it had a significant role in his life in Norway or helped him with integration, accessing information, or language learning.

Of the two cases, Nasim is a clear example of ‗active‘, determined use of social media – using it as a tool to solve problems - whereas Omar is an example of more ‗passive‘ use.

Literature and research has distinguished between these two forms of social media usage:

Active usage refers to activities that facilitate direct exchanges with others (e.g., posting status updates, commenting on posts); passive usage involves consuming information without direct exchanges (e.g., scrolling through news feeds, viewing posts)‖ (Verduyn et al., 2015, p.

480). Nasim and Omar represent examples of the two extremes, but exactly where most other participants fit is less easy to determine. Most admitted to being passive users of the

‗Refugees Welcome‘ groups – ‗watching‘ these groups but not actively interacting with them – but seemed, at various times, to be active in other groups and platforms.

Furthermore, whilst it is possible to point to some effects that differences in their usage of social media had for the participants in this study (and it seemed that active posting was associated with tangible positive outcomes – such as reported by Nasim, Hamid and Farah in Chapter 6, Section 6.2.3.1), what is unclear are the causes of this difference. What made Nasim more active and Omar more passive in their respective use of social media? The answers to this are not found in this study, since it was a finding that emerged from the data rather than something initially considered for exploration. It is possible to speculate on reasons, though: for example, prior experiences may have informed their attitudes towards social media (Nasim had never used social media before coming to Norway; Omar had been using it for eleven years), or personality traits. However, this is merely speculation, since little was asked about participants‘ about their personal backgrounds and experiences due to ethical considerations. Literature suggests that differences in social media use by migrants during adaptation to host countries can be a result of individual cultural and socioeconomic factors (such as language, level of education, age, communication styles, cultural

background) (Alampay, 2006, p.12; Alencar, 2017) and individual attitudes toward

integration; as well as the socio-political context of the host country (such as attitudes in the host country towards newcomers and integration policies) (Alencar, 2017, p. 6).

There is also debate in the literature about the effects of the passive use of social media, including effects on users‘ integration and well-being. Research with migrants in Ireland

81 found that passive ‗monitoring‘ of friends on social media facilitated durable and long-lasting transnational relationships for migrants which reduced their isolation, but that in turn this decreased their motivation to integrate into the host society (Komito & Bates, 2011). In relation to well-being, empirical research on Facebook use and young people has suggested that active use can have positive outcomes in the long run; that the negative effects can be greater for passive Facebook users; and that passive use undermines well-being (Tromholt, 2016; Frison & Eggermont, 2015; Verduyn et al, 2015). Negative effects of Facebook use are attributed largely to passive users being more likely to perceive the lives others that they see being better than theirs, which enhances feelings of envy. However, the case for the impact of active versus passive use of social media is not yet clear, and, as far as know, there have not yet been any studies using refugees.

The issue of ‗active‘ versus ‗passive‘ use of social media by participants in this study

generates more questions than answers. It was a striking and fascinating theme that emerged from the findings, rather than explicitly addressed in the research questions. However, it is an intriguing aspect of participants‘ social media use which could be further explored.