"The Regulars" - Social or Anti Social?

I happened to be in Philadelphia for a couple days because I was speaking on a panel at the Wharton Technology Conference, discussing Amatuer Content: Boom or Bust? A very interesting discussion, but not exactly what I want to write about in this post (I will write about the panel in a separate post). After the conference I caught up with a couple old friends and we stopped by McGlinchy's, which is probably the definition of a no-frills bar. That's what my group of friends likes. A place where its easy to get a drink, easy to hear yourself think and have a conversation, and there is by no means any shoulder to shoulder bumping going on while you are trying to move around the bar or someone standing in the way of the TV while the Eagles are playing. We also really like that 2 beers and 2 shots of whiskey is $8.45. I am off track.

Anyway, we were discussing whether web technologies and social networking are making people more or less socially adept. Are they increasing our ability to interact in person, or decreasing it? I believe that they are increasing it. An online profile is an extension of a person's offline profile. We build reputation online, based on implicit and explicit feedback to our web profile, which could give us more confidence in face to face interactions, or at a minimum information about what resonates with others and what doesn't.

But I understand the argument that says otherwise, and think that Sarah Stolfa tried to capture some proof of this social dynamic through photos from, coincidientally, McGlinchy's, which made me think back to her work. Her photography piece, "The Regulars",  won an award from New York Times Magazine in the "Capturing The Times" contest. She was a bartender at McGlinchy's and a photography student at Drexel when she submitted her photos in the contest. Having bartended myself for a couple years, I have a pretty good understanding of the types of people that frequent watering holes. Being behind the bar gives you a different perspective on how people interact, flirt, boast, learn, spectate, celebrate or just simply escape. Some people are social, some are not; some come with a group, some come trying to find a new group; some want to get a little out of control, some are too reserved to even feel comfortable in a bar environment. But they all come. At one point or another, almost everyone spends a little time in a bar. We can comprehend that. Its not a stretch to believe that people will seek out a social environment to satisfy one of many personal needs. But Sarah's photos tried to point to a specific type of bar-goer that I am sure exists at every bar. The bar-goer that just wants to be alone, but wants to be alone around others. By going to a social environment, they feel more comfortable being silent, or anti-social, than if they just stayed home. So the question is, will online social networks have a similar or greater proportion of these participants? Will some people use their online profiles and activities to satisfy all of their social needs and then have no desire to interact offline? I don't believe that they will. I believe that the new developments in technology allow people to find new ways to connect with others in the offline world. Its a discovery and connection mechanism and it will increase the ability for people to build relationships that otherwise may not have been found because of the limitations of finding like minded people offline. The online extension of a person's life will cause the opposite to occur - it will decrease anti-social tendencies. But I consistently hear the counterargument from people outside of Silicon Valley and wonder if there is something that we see that they don't, or vice versa.  Thoughts?