Since their emergence in the mid-1990\u2019s, online dating services have become an increasingly popular way for Americans to seek romantic partners and lifelong mates. While people have been finding love online since the earliest days of the internet, through newsgroups, chat rooms, games and other online communities, the meteoric development of the commercial dating industry has brought millions of paying users and mainstream exposure to the activity. The Online Publisher\u2019s Association reported in 2004 that dating websites created more revenue than any other paid online content category, as they netted roughly $470 million in consumer spending, up from about $40 million in 2001.[1. Online Publishers Association, \u201cOnline Paid Content U.S. Market Spending Report,\u201d March 2005. Available at: http:\/\/www.online-publishers.org\/pdf\/paid_content_report_030905.pdf<\/a> Note:<\/strong> These figures do not include the purchase of adult and\/or pornographic content online.]\u00a0 Revenue growth has slowed in recent years, but the industry continues to maintain a robust base of users, many of them willing to pay premium fees for access to specialized services.[2. eMarketer, \u201cOnline Dating Gets Tough,\u201d February 14, 2006. Available at: http:\/\/www.emarketer.com\/Article.aspx?1003826<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n All the while, online dating has also been solidifying its image offline, not only through features in movies, television, and advertising outlets, but also through the influence of daters\u2019 personal success stories, which have percolated through family, friends, and coworkers, and have contributed to the momentum and social acceptance of the practice.[3. See the following article for an example of this shift in attitudes: \u201cOnline Dating Sheds Its Stigma as Losers.com\u201d by Amy Harmon, from The New York Times<\/em>, 29 June 2003, Late Edition, pg.1.] A 2003 New York Times letter to the editor, written in response to a feature article on online dating, describes this ripple effect firsthand:<\/p>\n\n \u201cThe success of Sascha Segan, mentioned in your article, in meeting his fiancee, Leontine Greenberg, on Nerve.com persuaded a mutual friend of ours to try the service, and she convinced me.<\/p>\n Next year, I’m getting married to a man I met on Nerve.com. Two nights ago at a party, I ran into a friend of a friend and her new Internet-acquired boyfriend, who are the next step in the chain reaction started by Sascha and Leontine.<\/p>\n My thanks to Sascha for being so open about looking for love in cyberspace. May we all be so lucky.\u201d[4. \u201cFinding Your Heart\u2019s True Love Online,\u201d by Michelle Solomon, The New York Times<\/em>, 5 July 2003, Letters to the Editor, Section A.]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n The appeal of online dating undoubtedly varies from user to user, but convenience has been a key selling point in the marketing of the services. As some of the most popular online dating services suggest, users enjoy access to a pool of potential mates that is larger and easier to navigate than the offline world, and only costs as much as \u201cthe price of a couple drinks.\u201d[5. See the FAQ section at Match.com and the animated tour at Yahoo Personals for references to these attributes. The reference to the cost of access as equivalent to \u201cthe price of a couple drinks\u201d comes from the Match.com FAQ section, available at: http:\/\/www.match.com\/<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n Online dating has not always had the best reputation. When online dating activity was observed in the mid-1990s, some attention focused on the ease with which people could deceive others. One article in the St. Petersburg Times<\/em> on Valentine\u2019s Day 1995 stressed:<\/p>\n\n \u201cBut be warned, cyberdaters. You might find yourself having an erotic chat with someone named Bambi4You, who is really a man pretending to be a woman. [O]f course, you could be a woman pretending to be a man, or a man who is looking for a cross-dresser . . . the combinations are numerous.\u201d [6.numoffset=”6″ \u201cGetting it on-line\u201d by John A. Cutter, from the St. Petersburg Times<\/em>, (Florida) 12 February 1995, pg 3F.]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n Coincident with that kind of concern were those who suggested that the quest for dates online could be socially harmful. Typical of this sentiment was a 1999 article in the Washington Post <\/em>that sounded some dire warnings: <\/p>\n\n \u201cWhile Internet use can expand the number of While the success of online dating services suggests that these extreme cases have been the exception rather than the rule, some of these initial concerns about finding a partner online still resonate today. In an October 1996 advice column, Ann Landers cited a warning from a writer who advised those considering online dating to verify their date\u2019s identity, and to look out for signs that would-be daters are actually predators. The writer advised users to meet any dates arranged online in public places and to be wary of those who refuse to divulge both their work and home telephone numbers before meeting.[8. \u201cInternet User Offers Tips For Safety\u201d by Ann Landers, Creators Syndicate Inc. from Tulsa World<\/em>, 14 October 1996, Final Home Edition, pg. A5.] Likewise, the current \u201cSafety Tips\u201d page on Match.com in 2006 cautions that users would be wise to do some background research on their potential dates before meeting\u2014asking for photos and phone numbers and possibly even paying for a background check. Even more imperative, the site cautions, one should always meet in a public place for the first date.[9. See the \u201cSafety Tips\u201d section at Match.com, available at: http:\/\/www.match.com\/help\/safetytips.aspx<\/a>] While the site acknowledges that deceptive daters are undeniably part of the mix online (in the same way one might encounter ill-intentioned suitors at a nightclub or party), they recommend that users exercise the same discretion as they would in any offline dating situation.<\/p>\n\n Similarly, the same 2003 New York Times <\/em>article that prompted a glowing letter to the editor also yielded a letter of warning about dishonest daters from another reader:<\/p>\n\n \u201cAs a member of the online dating world, I can \u201cI met a woman who described herself as a This dater\u2019s experience is more indicative of the tradeoffs that many daters accept as simply part of the game. While this user had some disappointing experiences with dishonesty, it was not the type of deception that resulted in physical harm (though notably, this letter was written by a man). He still sees enough benefit to continue to be a regular \u201cmember\u201d of the online dating world, and he suggests that the redeeming aspects of someone\u2019s personality may resolve that person\u2019s exaggerated physical description. In this way, the risks and payoffs of the online dating world more closely resemble the basic realities of dating in the offline world.<\/p>\n\n Recent coverage in the popular press has reflected this. It is not clear exactly when public attitudes started to shift, but an ever-growing share of stories about people finding dates, romance, and even marriage partners online began to emerge in the early 2000s. <\/p>\n\nSome early concerns about the potential risks of online dating still linger, but deception seems to be the exception rather than the rule.<\/h3>\n\n
\n
\n
relationships\u2014intimate or not\u2014 and reduce the costs
of long-distance communication, habitual use can also
reduce a person’s social contacts with family members
and in-person friends, experts say. In extreme cases,
spouses, children, neighbors are pushed aside.\u201d[7. \u201cSex, Lies & E-mail; Internet dating offers plenty of opportunities to meet that special someone, but therapists warn that what you see online is not always what you get\u201d by Pamela Gerhardt, from The Washington Post<\/em>, 27 July 1999, Final Edition, pg. Z12.]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n
attest that there is a frequent disconnect between
who people say they are and the truth. What’s
most frustrating is not the outright lying
but the masterful deception.<\/p>\n
‘striking blonde.’ She was plain-looking
but an excellent bowler!\u201d[10. \u201cFinding Your Heart\u2019s True Love Online,\u201d by John Deprospo, The New York Times<\/em>, 5 July 2003, Letters to the Editor, Section A.]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\nThis study helps fill a gap in the research on online dating.<\/h3>\n\n