Innovations in knowledge sharing: creating our book of blogs

Kandy Woodfield is the Learning and Enterprise Director at NatCen Social Research, and the co-founder of the NSMNSS network. You can reach Kandy on Twitter @jess1ecat.

Yesterday the NSMNSS network published its first ebook, a collection of over fifty blogs penned by researchers from around the world who are using social media in their social research. To the best of our knowledge this is the first book of blogs in the social sciences.  It draws on the insights of experienced and well-known commentators on social media research through to the thoughts of researchers new to the field.

Why did we choose to publish a book of blogs rather than a textbook or peer-reviewed article?

 In my view there is space in the academic publishing world for peer reviewed works and self-published books. We chose to publish a book of blogs rather than a traditional academic tome because we wanted to create something quickly which reflected the concerns and voices of our members. Creating a digital text, built on people’s experiences and use of social media seemed an obvious choice. Many of our network members were already blogging about their use of social media for research, for those who weren’t this was an opportunity to write something short and have their voices heard.

Unlike other fields of social research,  social media research is not yet populated with established authors and leading writers, the constant state of flux of the field means it is unlikely to ever settle in quite the same way as ethnography say or survey research. The tools, platforms and approaches to studying them are constantly changing. In this context works which are published quickly to continue to feed the plentiful discussions about the methods, ethics and practicalities of social media research seem an important counterpoint to more scholarly articles and texts.

How did we do it?

Step 1 – Create a call for action: We used social media channels to publicise the call for authors, posting tweets with links to the network blog which gave authors a clear brief on what we were looking for. Within less than a fortnight we had over 40 authors signed up.

Step 2 -  Decide on the editorial control you want to have: We let authors know that we were not peer reviewing content, if someone was prepared to contribute we would accept that contribution unless it was off theme. In the end we used every submitted blog with one exception. This was an important principle for us, the network is member-led and we wanted this book to reflect the concerns of our members not those of an editor or peer-review panel. The core team at NatCen undertook light touch editing to formatting and spelling but otherwise the contributions are unadulterated. We also organised the contributions into themes to make it easier for readers to navigate.

Step 2 – Manage your contributions: We used Google Drive to host an author’s sign-up spreadsheet asking for contact information and also an indication of the blog title and content. We also invited people to act as informal peer reviewers. Some of our less experienced authors wanted feedback and this was provided by other authors. This saved time because we did not have to create a database ourselves and was invaluable when it came to contacting authors along the way.

Step 3 – Keep a buzz going and keep in touch with authors: We found it important to keep the book of blogs uppermost in contributors minds, we did this through a combination of social media (using the #bookofblogs) and regular blogs and email updates to authors.

Step 4 – Set milestones: we set not just an end date for contributions but several milestones along the way tgo achieve 40% and 60% of contributions, this helped keep the momentum going.

Step 5 – Choose your publishing platform: there are a number of self-publishing platforms. We chose to use Press Books which has a very smooth and simple user interface similar to many blogging tools like Wordpress. We did this because we wanted authors to upload their own contributions, saving administrative time. By and large this worked fine although inevitably we ended up uploading some for authors and dealing with formatting issues!

Step 6 – Decide on format and distribution channels - You will need to consider whether to have just an e-book, an e-book and a traditional book and where to sell your book. We chose Amazon and Kindle (Mobi) format for coverage and global reach but you can publish into various formats and there are a range of channels for selling your book. 

Step 7 – Stick with it… when you’re creating a co-authored text like this with multiple authors you need to stick with it, have a clear vision of what you are trying to create and belief that you will reach your launch ready to go. And we did, we hope you enjoy it.

Watch a short video featuring a few of the authors from the Book of Blogs discussing what their pieces are about, here. 

Join the conversation today; Buy the e-book here!

Video interview about the book “Social Media and Democracy” (edited by Brian Loader and Dan Mercea)

By Cheryl Jadav, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster
Watch the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxn4HjbTfYU

If you’re reading this, obviously, you follow social media!

Has politics and political democracy fascinated you? Do you wonder what impacts and what role does social media play, not only in our routinely life but in something as important and broad as politics and democracy?

The interview with Dr. Dan Mercea of City University London highlights the importance of social media in participatory politics. As he suggests, ‘Social Media is an instrument’ that supports democracy.

As Dan Mercea puts in, the book is a ‘fairly dated collection in internet time’. A collection based on a conference held in 2011, this book is for those who are interested in studying the internet and social media, politics and democracy.

Over the last couple of years, we have seen our social networks being flooded by the updates on the political occurrences throughout the globe, be it London or the Occupy Wall Street Moment or the protests on Tahrir Square or in the Ukraine. However, this book on participatory politics will help you understand the non-utopian role of social media in these political situations. One might often believe that social media is the reason behind all the political upheavals seen in recent times.

Democracy is a wide concept and a different perspective can be applied to the various occurrences. For some, casting a vote is democracy. For others, a wider participation of the masses is democracy. Social media aids the wider participation and looks beyond the act of merely casting a vote. As Dan Mercea suggests, social media has enabled more participation from the younger generation. Thus, it could be taken as a game changing act! An act that enables more participation, probably from the masses that might have been possibly left out.

The interview also discusses government surveillance and the power structures that exist and frame social media. A wave of public upheaval has been witnessed by us in places such as Egypt, India, Ukraine and so on. However, what has been the ultimate result? Has the government won or has the mass won?

If your interest lies in understanding social media, be it political or non-political, watch this video for more!

Writing on the wall: Social Media’s first 2000 years. A video about a book by Tom Standage

By Abdullah Anees, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster

Watch the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz2l-6yUHbg

At the beginning of our semester we were asked by our teacher Christian Fuchs to write a book review. The book had to be an academic reflection on social media. So I went away and searched for books by authors I could interview face to face.

I came across ‘Writing on the wall’ by Tom Standage, the digital editor of The Economist. In “Writing on the wall”, he argues how the concept of social media initially dates back to the Roman Period one century BC. He took me on an historical journey throughout time and highlighted how concepts of social media played roles throughout history.

From Cicero’s letters to Luther’s pamphlets to the modern day revolutions, Tom Standage discusses how sharing ideas that spread have had influences throughout time. After reading the book I can actually say looking back at history from a social media perspective was very interesting and enjoyable.

Graffiti on the walls of Pompeii or Tom’s comparison of old slates to a modern day iPad set a very engaging theme. However with any book review there are some parts you are left questioning. Questions I knew I would have the opportunity to ask Tom face to face.

Tom clearly outlines his intentions of the book in the introduction. He mentions his focus to be around the rise of social media in Western Europe and America. He admits that he is most comfortable in discussing Western media. However a more suited approach may have been to highlight the historical patterns of both social media in the East and West.

Another view I thought that would have made his work more engaging was if Tom related old social techniques to modern day techniques. One of the questions I asked him was if modern day graffiti could have been linked to graffiti in older societies and how they both were a way of self-expression. Tom explained how modern day graffiti was more of an art form whereas Pompeii graffiti shared slogans and he did not want to mix them together. I can see where Tom is coming from however I believe modern day graffiti be it art or slogans will always be a way for the artist to express themselves.

Once I finished reading the book, I made a final list of questions to ask Tom. This was my second interview I’ve ever conducted on camera and this time I was on my own.

So after a quick crash course on how to setup and use a professional camera and mic, I headed off to The Economist Plaza in central London to meet Tom. In the video included in this post, Tom gave me time to explain any doubts and questions I had, and provided realistic and honest answers.

I would like this opportunity to mention that I thoroughly enjoyed reading ‘Writing on the wall’ by Tom Standage. I would definitely recommend people interested in social media to take time in reading through some of the events that took place in history, which were influenced by media platforms.  I would also like to thank Tom Standage in agreeing to a face-to-face interview and to participate in the production of my video.

Tweets and The Streets: A video interview about Paolo Gerbaudo’s book

By Jamileh Kadivar, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster.

Watch the video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKeMTkqYF9I

The video I produced is an introduction to Tweets and The Streets: Social Media And Contemporary Activism, a must read and a great book with lots of interesting insights and a strong research foundations. The book was written by Paolo Gerbaudo and published by Pluto Press in 2012.

The video includes two interviews. In the beginning, I present the main arguments of the book and introduce the author as an academic, a journalist and also an activist; then, you can watch the interviewees' replies to my questions. Finally, I present my own conclusion.

The first interview was conducted with Paolo Gerbaudo on March 2nd, 2014, by Skype. Dr. Paolo Gerbaudo, a lecturer in Digital Culture and Society at King’s College London, answers questions about the key terms in his book, such as 'choreography of assembly' and 'choreographic leaders', and then explains how he defines leadership. He also challenges techno-optimistic and techno- pessimistic views and discusses the theoretical approach he took in the book. He narrates why he selected the 2011 movements, considering that there were also movements in the years before 2011 that have used social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as mobilizing tools. He also explains why out of so many movements, he chose the Arab Spring in Egypt, the Indignados movement in Spain, and the Occupy Wall Street movement in the US. He talks about the more recent events in Egypt and argues that what happened there in 2013 was a coup, and not a revolution or an extension of the 2011 Egyptian movement. He describes the main differences between anti-globalization movements and street protests clearly in this video.

My second interview in this video was conducted on March 5th, 2014. It is a face- to-face discussion with Dr. Miriyam Aouragh, an expert in social media and social movements, and a lecturer in the University of Westminster. She has written a review of Paolo Gerbaudo’s book. In this video, she speaks about the book's strengths and discusses her views and criticisms regarding the book in a fair and clear way.

Making a video for me, as a person without any previous experience in movie-production before this stimulating and challenging experiment, at first seemed something strange and far-fetched! At this time last year, I did not have a clue of how to do it. But now, I think it was both an interesting and fun activity that added well to the theoretical aspects of our modules. But still I'd rather prefer to write 10 essays than to make a video!

Last, but not least, the book is very well written and easy to read, not only for academics, but also for journalists, activists and ordinary people. I hope this video assists you to find good information about Tweets and the Street’s main ideas. I think, watching this video, before starting to read the book, can be helpful to get a good overview of the key arguments.

Alone Together: A Documentary about a book by Sherry Turkle

By Keurkoon Phoomwittaya, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster

Watch the video here: https://vimeo.com/90989359

In the early days of social interaction on the Internet I tried out different identities with avatars and used pseudonyms in virtual worlds. I learned and shared ideas in online forums that I was interested in such as Hamster Lovers society or the Thai fiction writers community. Nowadays, social media enterprises such as Facebook attract more people to spend their time on the platforms. At any time and on the move we can simulate ourselves to feel as if we were connected together and close with each other. The little mobile devices in our pockets shape and affect how we think about ourselves and relationships with others.

Because of my interest in such topics I became curious to read the book “Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other” by Sherry Turkle. I made a documentary based on the issues that her book discuses. I am still optimistic about the abilities that technology poses for us in order to explore new ideas and innovations. But also, we need to know what cause constraints on human relationships.

Researchers have been looking at the potentials as well as problems of technology. In this documentary Sisse Siggaard Jensen, professor of Digital Communication at Roskilde University in Denmark, mentioned that when the computer was first invented people were amazed by its potential as a medium for communication. Later, the World Wide Web helped the world to be open for new ideas. Then, scholars came to study massive multiplayer online role-playing games and social media. Many see positive impacts when something is new. But, as time goes by they also observe problems that affect us. 

In the past, Turkle was optimistic about the potential of the Internet for trying out various identities. But now, with the popular use of social networking sites such as Facebook, she is concerned that the always-on status of our lives has resulted in isolation and individualisation. She says: “These days, insecure in our relationships and anxious about intimacy, we look to technology for ways to be in relationships and protect ourselves from them at the same time” (Turkle 2011: xii). Her point convinced me that we need to know how the designs of different platforms affect our ability to reflect on ourselves and human relationships.

Jensen points out in the documentary that there are new opportunities for people to find possibilities for enjoyment and happiness in virtual worlds such as Second Life, World of Warcraft or EverQuest.  She sees them as spaces for developing resources and understandings with the help of social roles that are different from people’s ordinary lives. In virtual worlds like Second life people are not limited by their skin colour, gender or physical ability. Jensen et al. (2012) suggest that the ways people build virtual communities or experience extraordinary events through thought-provoking art installations hold the potential for creativity and inspirations (Jensen et al.,2012:3). Likewise, Howard Rheingold mentions in his book “Virtual Reality” that symbolic play is a positive act that draws cognition and culture together. “It’s a mental can-opener for liberating new ideas” (Rheingold 1992: 373). He suggests that imitating social roles through symbolic playing is important for everyone Rheingold 1992: 374). The Internet came with the promise that we could find opportunities to try out as well as enjoy making and exploring different virtual social spaces.

In the documentary, Jensen pinpoints that Facebook is a very limited world. The economy of "liking" posed by Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, is a constraint for creativity. While some spaces on the Internet give us resources to play and learn about ourselves in relation to others, our personal information on Facebook became a raw material for private corporations making profits.

If you are wondering why it is important to know more about the ways in which technology affects our lives and how the designs of the online platforms matter, this documentary is for you. The ‘Alone Together’ Documentary (https://vimeo.com/90989359) will take you on a journey, on which you can learn more about the development of empathic skills holding together relationships through play and creativity, the relationship of computers and humans, and how we use technology throughout our lifetime.

References

Jensen,S.S., Philips, L., & Strand D.L. 2012. Virtual worlds as sites for social and cultural innovation. Convergence. 18 (3), 3-10

Rheingold, H. 1992. Virtual Reality. Great Britain: Mandarin Paperbacks.

Turkle, S. 2011. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each other. United States: Basic Books.

The era of the ‘making and doing’ culture: A video about David Gauntlett’s book “Making is connecting”

By Tianzhang Zhao, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster

Watch the video here! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f-tJ3G5uRg

This video I produced is an interview with David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren talking about the book ‘Making is Connecting’. David Gauntlett is the author of this work. He is a sociologist and media theorist and works for University of Westminster in UK. Simon Lindgren is a sociologist as well, and a social media researcher, who works for Umeå University in Sweden.

The video is about 30 minutes long and is divided into 9 parts:

The first part is about the relationship between making things, individuals’ happiness, and society. In this book, David Gauntlett promotes that making things would reflect and realize individuals’ values, which would bring people happiness and would further influence society as a whole in a positive way. Therefore, this section is focused on the question if ‘making things’ can raise individuals’ happiness and advance a good society.

The second part is about creativity. As David Gauntlett says in his book, creativity is “a process which brings together at least one active human mind, and the material or digital world, in the activity of making something which is novel in that context, and is a process which evokes a feeling of joy”. In this section, David Gauntlett illustrates the idea of creativity in detail and where his idea about creativity comes from. Simon Lindgren discusses David Gauntlett’s definition of creativity and explains what creativity is to him.

The third part is about the transition from a ‘sit back and be told’ culture to a ‘making and doing’ culture. This section focuses on how this transition happens and the future of the Internet.

The fourth part is about the relationship between the ‘making and doing’ culture and social media. In this section, David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren discuss if social media be considered as a ‘product’ emerging from the ‘making and doing’ culture.

The fifth part is about how to motivate people to embrace the ‘making and doing’ culture. In the book, David Gauntlett points out that people today are still used to only ‘watch’, ‘listen’ and ‘share’, but do so much participate in making and doing things. Iin this section of the video, David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren talk about how one can best motivate people to go from the broadcast mode of media use towards real participation.

The sixth part is about how to describe people who use the Internet and social media. Both David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren do not want use the word ‘audience’ to describe people who use the Internet and social media. So, what term do two scholars employ? You can find out in the video.

The seventh part is about the ‘creative X’. ‘X’ represents the term that can best be used to describe people who use the Internet and social media. In this section, David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren talk about what is a ‘creative X’ to them and what kind of behavior could be called ‘creative’.

The eighth part is about free digital labour. In the book, David Gauntlett points out that the social media owners are making money from the ‘creative X’ and squeeze their labour. In this section, David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren talk about their ideas towards this issue.

The final part is about the users’ awareness of free labour. David Gauntlett and Simon Lindgren talk about whether people online have awareness of the free labour issue or not.

Under constant surveillance: A video about the collected volume “Media, Surveillance and Identity”

By María Belén Conti, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster.

I have directed a movie about the collected volume “Media, Surveillance and Identity” that has been edited by André Jansson and Miyase Christensen.Watch the video interview here! https://vimeo.com/91504300

As early as 1995, John Thompson was talking of a world of “mediated visibility” in which technology was a double-edged sword, since it allowed the few people in power positions to control the many, but also empowered the many to control those few. Since then, many things have changed, with the Internet growing in importance as well as with the appearance of a new actor: social media.

In these social and networked spaces, private and public communications merge and the invisible turns visible. It is no longer easy to maintain the private sphere private and unintended audiences may reach any message we send. But these unintended audiences that have access to our communications are not only other users but also government agencies and companies, as Edward Snowden’s revelations known as the “NSA affair” and the many forms of targeted advertising can testify.

In other words, we are always potentially under surveillance or monitoring by others, either peers, companies or states. Even though that does not mean that we are all the time under one-on-one monitoring, the potential is there. And most of the times, there is a big power asymmetry, since people sometimes do not even know that they are being watched or, if they do, they feel powerless or out of options.

Even though it can be argued that people can use social and networked media for free in exchange of giving up some personal information, as Miyase Christensen explains in the video, people are in fact paying a very big price for that supposedly free use. Mark Andrejevic argues in this context in the collected volume that data has become “the new oil” or commodity exchanged and commercialized for the “free use” of services.

In other words, even though people may think they are the clients of these social and networked media, they are in fact the product being sold to advertisers in order to make profits. What is more, they are “unpaid workers”, as Allmer, Fuchs, Kreilinger and Sevignani argued in the collected volume, since they are producing all the data being sold to the advertisers, who will then target those same users with specific forms of ads, according to their taste and interests.

But is an alternative to that commercial model possible? In fact, there are some alternative social media such as Diaspora* which intend to protect the data of the users. However, people want to be where most of their peers are, so it is hard to make them migrate to this alternative social media. And in the lack of better solutions, or at least until a better idea comes, education and better legislation to protect users are needed, as both Miyase Christensen and André Jansson, editors of the book Media, Surveillance and Indentity. Social perspectives, point out in my video.

Vlogging: Video interview about Dhiraj Murthy’s book “Twitter: Social Communication in the Twitter Age”

By Barrie Schooling, student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster

Watch the video interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3u4CyVStk4

Google ‘Twitter book review’ and you’ll get reviews of 1,000 page tomes reduced to 140 characters, for example “The Unbearable Lightness of Being - Beautiful and thought provoking novel of love, obsession, lust and oppression". This sort of activity, indeed every sort of activity on Twitter from the profound to the banal are the subject of a book called ‘Twitter: Social Communication in the Twitter Age’ by Dhiraj Murthy.

Having recently written a review of the book I arranged to interview Dhiraj in his Goldsmiths lab and chat to him a bit more about his work and to ask questions that might help to me critically review his work.

In ‘Twitter. Social communication in the Twitter age’ Dhiraj Murthy discusses the platform as it gives ‘ordinary’ people a medium to publish ‘user-generated “news/updates”, Twitter is a ‘social media’ where the ‘social’ is derived from the content being created by users rather than a ‘traditional’ media outlet.

Traditional media content is determined by the producer whereas the process is more democratic in Twitter. Murthy identifies ‘whoever is considered to be an expert or simply worthy of being listened to is potentially determined by consumers rather than producers’. Users can choose what information they wish to receive through the accounts they follow – ‘they can choose from a variety of sources: traditional media, individual commentators, friends, leaders in an occupational field’.

Murthy explores the notion of the ‘global village’ and other’s who see Twitter as the realisation of the global village, for example ‘fashion enthusiasts can interact with fashionistas in London and Paris, regardless of where they live’.

On one hand Twitter ‘can be thought of as a megaphone that makes public the voices/conversations of any individual or entity’ but yet if the voices ‘reflect influence already present in traditional media’ then it isn’t truly a democratizing technology merely a different medium for the same messages. Murthy presents an ‘event society’ but given that these ‘trending topics’ or ‘events’ can often be a mixture of a major news story alongside a celebrity story he questions what constitutes an event? A major political rebellion is undoubtedly an ‘event’ but is what your colleague had for breakfast?

Murthy observes many changes to traditional journalism, from Twitter adding to journalists’ ‘source mix’ to historically impartial journalists giving personal viewpoints via Twitter to the idea of ‘crowdsourcing’ and he gives examples like users looking through the great volume of MP’s expenses for discrepancies.

The ‘citizen journalist’ is presented through coverage of the Mumbai bombings in 2008 and the US Airways flight that downed in the Hudson River in 2009, both of which were first reported via Twitter. Although the ‘citizen journalist’ has in the aforementioned cases been the first to report on the story Murthy presents a case for the traditional news media still being the main reference point for verification of the story.

Throughout the book Murthy is careful not to over- or under-credit Twitter’s importance to the subject at hand, be it in saving lives following a disaster. This chapter on Activism uses statistics to debunk a number of myths about the role of Twitter in Arab Spring uprisings and the so-called ‘Twitter Revolution’.

Whilst not entirely convinced about ‘revolutions’ happening as a direct result of Twitter activity Murthy does constantly note social changes arising as a result of its usage and the chapter ‘Twitter and Health’ provides one such example. Throughout the chapter we are given examples of changes (and limitations) in people’s medical advice and opinion being shared via Twitter, to new support groups forming via Twitter or to the use of hashtags to filter the usually like-minded into the similarly-diagnosed.

I’d like to thank Dhiraj for allowing me to interview him and I hope you enjoy listening to his opinions on the subject.

Understanding Geert Lovink’s book “Networks without a cause: A critique of social media”: A video by Akin Olaniyan

Akin Olaniyan is a student in the MA in Social Media at the University of Westminster

Watch the video interview here! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV-PBy3iaDk

He sounds very much like a techno-pessimist. When I first read Professor Geert Lovink’s book, ‘Networks without a cause: A critique of social media,’ the first thing that struck me was the sense of despair that runs through all the chapters. With chapters devoted to Facebook and the crisis of identity, big data and the ‘Googlisation of our lives,’ and a proposition to divorce the study of social media from media studies, there appeared to be no other way to understand Geert Lovink. And that was the starting point of my interview with him conducted via Skype. As you can see in the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV-PBy3iaDk), when I asked him what was the source of the despair I felt running through his book, Geert describes his frustration that the Internet has become too centralized and cites cloud computing as evidence. He feels it was time the Internet went back to the original format of small networks.

One of the comments on the blurb of his book, by McKenzie Wark (author of Gamer Theory and Professor of Culture and Media at The New School), describes Geert as our Tin Tin. ‘Like canny adventurer, he travels the world discovering new frontiers of both folly and invention,’ McKenzie writes and that was instantly confirmed when Geert – after he found where I was from – expressed an interest in working in Nigeria if there was a good chance to teach critical Internet Cultures.

I find that this interview is a rare insight into the minds and works of a scholar who sounds techno-pessimistic but whose research and works focus on making the Internet more workable.

On big data and social media alternatives for instance, Geert, whose works have focused on developing alternative social media, is critical of big data and the concentration of power in the hands of few corporations like Google.  “When we talk of alternatives to social media we refer to alternative variations of the known platforms. So, an alternative to Google would be a search engine without all this commercial bias, a search engine that will be based on other algorithmic principles,” he says. And on Facebook, Geert says: “When we talk of alternatives to Facebook, we mean a social network that is truly local and doesn’t work with this ridiculous notion of friends as a general principle of connecting people.” He sounded to me more like an activist than a university teacher.

When asked how to best arrange funding for such alternative social media platforms, Geert admits there may be no global solution owing to differences from country to country but mentioned subscription and the public library model as possible options for consideration.

I finally asked him whether he considers himself as belonging to the same school of thought as Evgeny Morozov and Neil Postman since I found as I felt his arguments sound techno-pessimistic. He appeared to smile at the question but looked serious as he answered: “I strongly believe that we have to team up with start-ups, programmers and insert a political and cultural agenda there. I come from a background where we see ourselves as developers of the network and that is different from traditional techno pessimist point of view. I have absolute joy in the constructive value of ruthless radical critique.” Overall, I find Geert an interesting scholar, especially after I received copies of other books he co-authored, which he freely offered. A quick look at two of those books, ‘Unlike Us Reader: Social Media Monopolies and their Alternatives,’ and ‘Video Vortex Reader: Responses to YouTube,’ confirm my feeling that this is no ordinary scholar but one who is at the same time an activist.

Defining YouTube as Social Media

In this post Chareen Snelson, Ed.D. considers YouTube as Social Media...

Defining Social Media in General

The discussion surrounding the definition of “social media” brings to light just how challenging it can be to precisely define something that we think we understand until we try to explain it. For many of us, Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube spring to mind during discussions of social media. However, these are specific manifestations of a broader phenomena. From my perspective, social media represents a set of technologies that allow people to share content and make connections with others online. Although my perspective may capture the essence of what I think social media is, it may or may not be in agreement with what others think. One way to explore this is with a simple search phrase in Google using, “define: social media.” The results of this search reveal a plethora of definitions. One of the simplest definitions for social media shown as a dictionary entry near the top of the search results is, “websites and applications used for social networking.” Scrolling down we find that the Urban Dictionary has a rather humorous definition for social media based on the functionality of various platforms. For example, “Facebook-I like doughnuts,” “Twitter-I'm eating #doughnuts,” and “Youtube-Here I am eating doughnuts.”  (See: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=socialmedia)

I regard Wikipedia as a nice launching point for quests such as this, so I took a few minutes to explore their rather lengthy article on the topic of social media. There I found a quoted definition from Kaplan and Haenlein (2010), who define social media as “...a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content” (p. 61). The Kaplan and Haenlein definition has also been quoted by van Dijck (2013) and possibly others. I rather like this definition since it has found its way into the peer-reviewed scholarly literature. Whether or not it is the final word on how we define social media remains to be seen.

Defining YouTube as Social Media

At first glance, the attributes of YouTube seem to align well with Kaplan and Haenlein's definition of social media. With YouTube we have a group of internet-based applications that support the creation and exchange of user-generated video. We can easily upload our videos, create our own channels, connect with other YouTube users, or share videos across other social media platforms such as Facebook or Twitter. Yet, some of the core attributes of YouTube are changing, which seem to threaten some of the social aspects of interest to users and researchers. 

My perspective on this topic is that of an educator who teaches a course on YouTube and digital video production and a researcher who uses YouTube as a data source. My involvement with YouTube has been quite active since its early days. It is beyond the scope of this post to discuss the entire history of YouTube or my evolution through teaching and researching about it. However, I would like to share a couple of observations about YouTube and some of the changes that may impact how it fits in the social-media landscape.

1. The Changing Nature of “Community” on YouTube

YouTube has always defined itself as a “community” with tools that support interaction among its users (YouTube, n.d.). When I first started teaching courses on YouTube in 2008 my students could add each other as friends and they could easily contact each other privately through the YouTube messaging system. Back then, YouTube seemed to be more about videos and friend connections. In 2011, YouTube merged the friends tool with the subscriptions tool (Scott, 2011). We could no longer have friends on YouTube, only subscribers who we communicated with via comments or private messages. It seemed as though the idea of community was beginning to change.

In early November of 2013 YouTube implemented a dramatic change to how it handles comments (Janakiram & Zunger,2013). The comment system is now integrated with Google+. Part of the reason for this was apparently to deal with the plague of hateful, racist, and vulgar commentary that had been going for the eight plus years of YouTube’s existence. Responses to the new comment system varied from positive to very negative (See the comments posted in response to Janakiram & Zunger,2013). My observations of the switch revealed some rather startling changes. For the first few hours all of the comments were missing from my YouTube channel. Later the comments returned, but with changes to the functionality. I could no longer reply to comments posted prior to the switch, nor could I reply to some of the comments posted after the switch due to some sort of permissions problem. My YouTube inbox displayed a notification that read, “Most comment notifications will now be delivered by Google+ and not to your inbox.” The comments that have been posted to my videos now appear under a “fans” section of the community area of my YouTube account. Over time our former YouTube “friends” have become first “subscribers” and now our “fans” in the YouTube community. This is a very curious change that makes me wonder how we will define YouTube community or how Google+ might take over as the social platform for YouTube.

2. The Changing Availability of “Social Data” on YouTube

The second observation I would like to briefly mention is how the availability of social data has changed over time on YouTube. What I mean by social data is information about the people who comprise the YouTube community. This issue becomes apparent when using YouTube as a data source for social media research projects. In the past, I have used publically available YouTube videos, comments, user profiles, and viewer demographics in my research studies. As already mentioned, comments are changing, which may impact how we access or use them for research. User and viewer demographics are also vanishing from YouTube. As of the time of this writing, we cannot visit a YouTube channel to find out the age or country of origin for the owner of the channel like we used to be able to do. Viewer statistics, which are available under each video player, are now stripped of gender, age, and country of origin information. Whether this information returns in some other form remains to be seen. Perhaps we will learn more about the people we interact with in the YouTube community via Google+.

In conclusion, I would like to return to the idea of defining social media. I have to wonder if we can go beyond broad definitions that encompass a wide variety of applications or practices, which can change or evolve at any time. Perhaps in the end we will find that social media is a spectrum rather than a single definition. I look forward to further discussion on this topic as we collectively grapple with the definition of social media.

References

Janakiram, N., & Zunger, Y. (2013, November 6). Turning comments into conversations that matter to you [web log post]. Official YouTube Blog. Retrieved from http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2013/11/youtube-new-comments.html

Kaplan, A.M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003

Scott, J. (2011, December 15). YouTube friends and subscriptions are merging, kind of [web log post]. REELSEO. Retrieved from http://www.reelseo.com/youtube-friends-and-subscriptions/

van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. New York: NY. Oxford University Press.

YouTube (n.d.). Community. YouTube Playbook. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/yt/playbook/community.html