Sexuality & Culture

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 347–365 | Cite as

There’s an App for that: The Uses and Gratifications of Online Social Networks for Gay Men

  • David Gudelunas
Original Paper


This essay is an exploratory study of the uses and gratifications of social networking applications and sites widely utilized by gay men. Based on findings from six different focus groups and intercept interviews with gay and bisexual men, this essay explores the motivations and perceived benefits of social networking sites that allow for the creation of a virtual community of sexual minorities. This paper also considers these technological developments as part of a larger history of gay men communicating with other gay men within a culture where talk about homosexuality is closely policed and often restricted. Through a uses and gratifications approach, this essay discusses the needs and motivations that bring gay men online to social network sites, how they manage multiple identities online and the resulting gratifications of their online activity.


Social media Uses and gratifications theory Gay men Qualitative 


  1. Acar, A. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of online social networking behavior: The case of facebook. Journal of Website Promotion, 3(1/2), 62–83. doi: 10.1080/15533610802052654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ancu, M., & Cozma, R. (2009). Myspace politics: Uses and gratifications of befriending candidates. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(4), 567–583. doi: 10.1080/08838150903333064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2010). Millennials will make online sharing in networks a lifelong habit. Pew Research. Retrieved from website:
  4. Anthony, M. (2008). Looking for love, 2.0. Frontiers, 26(20), 53–54.Google Scholar
  5. Ashford, C. (2006). The only gay in the village: Sexuality and the net. Information & Communications Technology Law, 15(3), 275–289. doi: 10.1080/13600830600961202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baams, L., Jonas, K., Utz, S., Bos, H., & Van Der Vuurst, L. (2011). Internet use and online social support among same sex attracted individuals of different ages. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1820–1827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bargh, J. A., & Mckenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blumler, J. G. (1985). The social character of media gratifications. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, & P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Media gratifications research (pp. 41–60). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Blumler, J. G., & Mcquail, D. (1969). Television in politics. Its uses and influence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  11. Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Byeng-Hee, C., Seung-Eun, L., & Byoung-Sun, K. (2006). Exploring factors affecting the adoption and continuance of online games among college students in South Korea: Integrating uses and gratification and diffusion of innovation approaches. New Media & Society, 8(2), 295–319. doi: 10.1177/1461444806059888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Byrne, D. N. (2007). Public discourse, community concerns, and civic engagement: Exploring black social networking traditions on blackplanet.Com. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 319–340. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00398.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chauncey, G. (1994). Gay New York: Gender, urban culture, and the making of the gay male world. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, L., & Roberts, S. (2010). Employer’s use of social networking sites: A socially irresponsible practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 507–525. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0436-y.Google Scholar
  16. Davison, K., Pennebaker, J., & Dickerson, S. (2000). Who talks? The social psychology of illness support groups. American Psychology, 55, 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dreier, T. (2009). There’s a (gay) app for that. Advocate (1027/1028), 20.Google Scholar
  18. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.Google Scholar
  19. Evans, V. D. (2007). Curved tv: The impact of televisual images on gay youth. American Communication Journal, 9(3), 7–17.Google Scholar
  20. Farrell, K. P. (2006). HIV on tv: Conversations with young gay men. Sexualities, 9(2), 193–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gay and lesbian adults are more likely and more frequent blog readers. (2010). Retrieved from
  22. Gay and lesbian adults more likely to read blogs and use social networking tools. (2009). Echelon Intel, 1–1.Google Scholar
  23. Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  24. Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1130–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grimmelmann, J. (2009). Saving facebook. (privacy on social network sites). Iowa Law Review, 94(4), 1137–1170.Google Scholar
  26. Gudelunas, D. (2005). Online personal ads—community and sex, virtually. Journal of Homosexuality, 49(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hardey, M. (2004). Mediated relationships. Information, Communication & Society, 7(2), 207–222. doi: 10.1080/1369118042000232657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harwood, J. (1997). Viewing age: Lifespan identity and television viewing choices. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41, 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hook up violence is on the rise. (2010). Frontiers, 29(2), 16.Google Scholar
  31. Humphreys, L. (1970). Tearoom trade. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  32. Ibrahim, Y. (2008). The new risk communities: Social networking sites and risk. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 4(2), 245–253. doi: 10.1386/macp.4.2.245_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jackson, N. A., & Lilleker, D. G. (2007). Seeking unmediated political information in a mediated environment: The uses and gratifications of political parties’ e-newsletters. Information, Communication & Society, 10(2), 242–264. doi: 10.1080/13691180701307495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2002). Online and in the know: Uses and gratifications of the web for political information. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2004). A web for all reasons: Uses and gratifications of internet components for political information. Telematics and Informatics, 21(3), 197–223. doi: 10.1016/s0736-5853(03)00037-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. King, J. (2010, April 28, 2010). Iphone’s gay social networking app leads to murder of phoenix man, police claim, Phoneix New Times.Google Scholar
  39. Kruegar, R. A. (1998). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Larose, R., & Eastin, M. S. (2004). A social cognitive theory of internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48(3), 358–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Leslie, J. (2009). Grindr app makes it easy to be easy. Out & About, 8, 8–26.Google Scholar
  43. Livingstone, S. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10(3), 393–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mahajan, P. (2009). Use of social networking in a linguistically and culturally rich India. International Information & Library Review, 41, 129–136. doi: 10.1016/j.iilr.2009.07.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mckenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the internset: Identity “demarginalization” through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 681–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moita-Lopes, L. P. (2006). Queering literacy teaching: Analyzing gay-themed discourses in a fifth-grade class in Brazil. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 5(1), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. New LGBT social networking site launches. (2010). Quest: Wisconsin’s Gay News Leader, 17(3), 6–6.Google Scholar
  49. Ordering in. (2008). Genre Magazine (165), 13–14.Google Scholar
  50. Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of internet use. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 44, 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Putman, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Shuster.Google Scholar
  52. Rhodes, S. D. (2004). Hookups or health promotion? An exploratory study of a chat room-based HIV prevention intervention for men who have sex with men. AIDS Education and Prevention, 16, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Richardson, J. D. (2003). Uses and gratifications of agnostic refuge: Case study of a skeptical online congregation. Journal of Media & Religion, 2(4), 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rubin, A. M. (1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication, 34, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rubin, A. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1985). Interface of personal and mediated communication: A research agenda. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 2, 36–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Silenzio, V. M. B., Duberstein, P. R., Tang, W., Lu, N., Tu, X., & Homan, C. M. (2009). Connecting the invisible dots: Reaching lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents and young adults at risk for suicide through online social networks. Social Science & Medicine, 69, 469–474.Google Scholar
  57. Smith, C. (2010). Social network led to man’s murder, police say. Huffington Post. Retrieved from The Huffington Post website:
  58. Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 412–434.Google Scholar
  59. Stephure, R. J., Boon, S. D., Mackinnon, S. L., & Deveau, V. L. (2009). Internet initiated relationships: Associations between age and involvement in online dating. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(3), 658–681. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01457.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Strehlke, C. (2010). Social network sites: A starting point for career development practitioners. Journal of Employment Counseling, 47(1), 38(11).Google Scholar
  61. Stryker, S., & Van Buskirk, J. (1996). Gay by the bay: A history of queer culture in the San Francisco bay area. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.Google Scholar
  62. Tanis, M. (2007). Online social support groups. In A. Joinson, K. Y. A. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U. Reips (Eds.), Oxford handbook of internet psychology (pp. 137–152). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Taraszow, T., Aristodemou, E., Shitta, G., Laouris, Y., & Arsoy, A. (2010). Disclosure of personal and contact information by young people in social networking sites: An analysis using facebook profiles as an example. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 6(1), 81–101. doi: 10.1386/macp.6.1.81/1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Turner, M. (2003). Backward glances: Cruising the queer streets of New York and London. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
  65. Tustin, N. (2010). The role of patient satisfaction in online health information seeking. Journal of Health Communication, 15(1), 3–17. doi: 10.1080/10810730903465491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Utz, S. (2009). The (potential) benefits of campaigning via social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2), 221–223.Google Scholar
  67. Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site?: Facebook use and college students’ life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 827–875.Google Scholar
  68. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (1994). Mass media research: An introduction. Blemont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  69. Young, G. (2004). From broadcasting to narrowcasting to ‘mycasting’: A newfound celebrity in queer internet communities. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 18(1), 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zacharias, U., & Arthurs, J. (2008). Introduction. Feminist Media Studies, 8(2), 197–223. doi: 10.1080/14680770801980612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fairfield UniversityFairfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations