Identity and social media

Abstract

Given the quantity of data social networks produce – millions of data points and in some cases billions on the scale of big data analysis – how do we frame the quantitative analysis of this data in terms of theoretical models of identity? In 2008, Vincent Miller’s article in Convergence recognized in our ubiquitous and pervasive media the essential role of phatic communication which forms our connection to the here and now. Social media has become a native habitus for many and is a place to perform our various roles in our multimodal lives, as a professional, a parent, an acquaintance, and a colleague. The current generation has grown up with social media and like the 10-year-old Facebook, Twitter too has become part of some people’s everyday here and now. In this issue, Nicholas Carah, Sven Brodmerkel, and Lorena Hernandez focus on how Facebook works not just as a platform to harvest data but also as a platform to manage the circulation of affect and creation of social connections around brands. Looking specifically at drinking culture and Facebook, they argue that some social media engagement practices allow for circumventing regulatory regimes by prompting connections between mediations of drinking culture and the brand that would not be possible in other media channels. Yet do we understand the aspects and patterns of identity development in virtual worlds? As Margaretten and Gaber (2014) have proposed the concept of ‘authentic talk’ identified as ‘spontaneous, unrehearsed discourse’ on Twitter, in this issue Bernadett Koles and Peter Nagy offer an alternative conceptual model to researchers of a virtual identity developed to capture this complex conglomerate of personal, social, relational, and material aspects. While Tamara Shepherd and Thorsten Busch argue that Twitter has acquired the critical mass of users necessary to successfully establish a robust and financially viable social network. Employing a business ethics perspective, Shepherd and Busch examine Twitter’s ethos in relation to debates around democratic communication in relation to corporate social responsibility. ‘This issue becomes all the more pressing because online social networks to a certain extent have taken on the role of quasi-governmental bodies today, regulating what their users can and cannot do, thus raising questions of accountability and legitimacy’ (2014: 294).