Online Communities and Where to Find Them: Conceptual and Analytical Frameworks
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes413 views
The document outlines various frameworks for analyzing online communities and their structures, such as groups, communities, crowds, and publics. It emphasizes the differences in interconnections, interests, and roles within these social network formations and discusses clustering techniques used to identify and understand these online interactions. Additionally, it touches on the impact of hashtags in shaping user engagement and the evolving nature of the public sphere in the digital age.
Online Communities and Where to Find Them: Conceptual and Analytical Frameworks
- 1. CRICOS No.00213J Online Communities and Where to Find Them: Conceptual and Analytical Frameworks Prof. Axel Bruns Australian Laureate Fellow a.bruns@qut.edu.au | @snurb_dot_info
- 4. 3.7m known Australian accounts Network of follower connections Filtered for degree ≥1000 255k nodes (6.4%), 61m edges Edges not shown in graph The Australian Twittersphere Teen Culture Aspirational Sports Netizens Arts & Culture Politics Television Fashion Popular Music Food & Drinks Agriculture Activism Porn Education Cycling News & Generic Hard Right Progressive South Australia Celebrities Horse Racing https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117748162
- 5. CRICOS No.00213J US progressives US conservatives France / Germany Italy Brazil India alternative health conspiracies UK alternative finance FakeNIX Domain Sharing on Facebook, 2016-21 Nodes: public pages, groups, verified profiles / domains in posts Size: weighted in-degree Colour: weighted in-degree FakeNIX domain posts, 1 Jan. 2016 to 31 Mar. 2021 https://snurb.info/node/2625
- 6. CRICOS No.00213J climate change denial antivax alternative medicine alternative food astrology UFOs autism UK left UK satire Detail: Conspiracy Theorists
- 11. CRICOS No.00213J • Nodes in a network, entities in a collection • Sharing certain measurable properties (attributes, connections) • Artificially grouped based on (superficial?) similarities Clusters https://snurb.info/node/2213
- 12. CRICOS No.00213J • Nodes in a network, entities in a collection • Sharing certain measurable properties (attributes, connections) • Artificially grouped based on (superficial?) similarities Clusters How and Where to Find Them • Modularity detection in networks • Clustering by attributes for other datasets • Different levels of sensitivity might produce very different results – no one true answer • Potential hierarchies: clusters, subclusters, subsubclusters, …
- 13. CRICOS No.00213J • Small number, known to each other • Shared interests, values, and aims • Stable relationships and distinct roles Groups Photo by Saksham Gangwar on UnSplash
- 14. CRICOS No.00213J • Small number, known to each other • Shared interests, values, and aims • Stable relationships and distinct roles Groups How and Where to Find Them • Strong, repeated, stable interconnections / interactions • Shared language, identity markers, media objects • Similar activity patterns
- 15. CRICOS No.00213J • Larger, key members known to each other • Shared but contestable interests, values, and aims • More complex structure involving centre and periphery, leaders and followers Communities Photo by Jacinto Diego on Unsplash
- 16. CRICOS No.00213J • Larger, key members known to each other • Shared but contestable interests, values, and aims • More complex structure involving centre and periphery, leaders and followers Communities How and Where to Find Them • Repeated, stable interconnections / interactions • Emergence of influential lead participants • Centre / periphery distinctions (e.g. 1/9/90, Pareto: creators, contributors, lurkers) • More interactions within community than outside it (e.g. E-I Index) • Broadly shared language, identity markers, media objects
- 17. CRICOS No.00213J • Much larger and much less knowable • Transient and temporarily gathered in one space (online or offline) • Some shared identity or interests but no universally shared values Crowd Photo by Joseph Chan on Unsplash
- 18. CRICOS No.00213J • Much larger and much less knowable • Transient and temporarily gathered in one space (online or offline) • Some shared identity or interests but no universally shared values Crowd How and Where to Find Them • Large to very large number of participants • Strong activity for limited period of time, or around defined issues • Similar activity patterns, but limited interaction between participants • Shared language, identity markers, media objects relating to specific driving issue
- 19. CRICOS No.00213J • Centred around shared interest, issue, text • Capable of forming and dissolving rapidly (e.g. ad hoc publics, issue publics, …) • Aware of each other and able to communicate publicly • May develop shared values through their communication • Capable of organising in support of a common goal Public Photo by Colin Lloyd on Unsplash
- 20. CRICOS No.00213J • Centred around shared interest, issue, text • Capable of forming and dissolving rapidly (e.g. ad hoc publics, issue publics, …) • Aware of each other and able to communicate publicly • May develop shared values through their communication • Capable of organising in support of a common goal Public How and Where to Find Them • Large to very large number of participants • Strong activity for limited period of time, or around defined issues • Similar activity patterns, and greater levels of interaction between participants • Shared language, identity markers, media objects relating to specific driving issue • Centring around key values can produce longer-term structures and leadership
- 21. CRICOS No.00213J • Centred around a shared (media) text • Large but dispersed and usually unknown to each other • Unlikely to share values beyond central common interest • Incapable of acting together Audience Photo by Ben Tofan on Unsplash
- 22. CRICOS No.00213J • Centred around a shared (media) text • Large but dispersed and usually unknown to each other • Unlikely to share values beyond central common interest • Incapable of acting together Audience How and Where to Find Them • Unified by central text (live performance, media object, event / issue hashtag, …) • Participant numbers from niche to very large • Observing rather than actively contributing • Therefore invisible to and unaware of each other • Often imagined and assumed rather than tangibly traceable
- 23. CRICOS No.00213J And #Hashtags? • Very common question in social media research: • Audiences: if users are simply following the hashtag (#AUSvNZL) • Crowds: if users are posting into but not following the hashtag (#auspol, for most people) • Publics: if hashtags are used to coordinate public action (#metoo, #blacklivesmatter) • Communities: if there is sustained engagement by regular participants (#auspol, for some) • Groups: if there is a strong sense of shared identity between regulars (#agchatoz) • Clusters: sure, as long as there is any activity at all Not every hashtag is a community!
- 24. CRICOS No.00213J And the Public Sphere?
- 25. CRICOS No.00213J • “Mediated political communication” • “Carried on by an elite” • “On a virtual stage of mediated communication” (Habermas, 2006) Public Sphere Photo by Mike Philipp on Unsplash
- 26. CRICOS No.00213J https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1412688.1412691 (Image: Julien Beauséjour) ‘The’ Public Sphere, Today Mainstream media Niche media Publics, communities, … Everyday communication
- 27. CRICOS No.00213J • Publics, Crowds, … • Triggered by issues and events • Fast-moving and short-lived • Limited in focus and scope • Public Spherules (incl. Groups, Communities) • Defined by topics and themes • More persistent and stable • Broader scope but unified by common theme (cf. Cunningham, “Popular Media as Public ‘Sphericules’ for Diasporic Communities”) • Public Spheres? • Domain-, identity-, platform-specific • E.g. political, Indigenous, Twittersphere • Persistent and highly visible • Encompassing relevant publics and spherules • ‘The’ Public Sphere? • Traditionally, an arena for public debate amongst elites in front of mass media audiences • Now, the sum total of smaller publics, spherules, and spheres? (cf. Bruns, “Digital Public Spheres in Australia”) Digital Publics and ‘the’ Public Sphere
- 28. CRICOS No.00213J Click to edit Master title style Thank you!
- 29. CRICOS No.00213J Inputs to this were supported by the ARC Future Fellowship project Understanding Intermedia Information Flows in the Australian Online Public Sphere, the ARC LIEF project TrISMA: Tracking Infrastructure for Social Media Analysis, and the ARC Discovery project Evaluating the Challenge of 'Fake News' and Other Malinformation. Future research is supported by the ARC Laureate Fellowship project Dynamics of Partisanship and Polarisation in Online Public Debate, commencing in early 2022. Facebook data are provided courtesy of CrowdTangle. Acknowledgments
Editor's Notes
- #6: Colour + size: weighted indegree