Shitstorms, bobler eller sagsorienterede offentligheder? Digitale metoder og kontroverser på sociale medier
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22439/dansoc.v29i1.5723Nøgleord:
digitale metoder, facebook, offentlighed, kontrovers, Latour, betalingsringen.Resumé
Kontroversen om planerne for en betalingsring i København afstedkom blandt andet en række sider på Facebook. Eksemplet er ikke enestående: Sociale medier lægger i disse år ofte brugerflade til folkelige protester og kontroverser. Sociologien har med digitale metoder fået en række værktøjer til at indsamle data om dem. Flere af de digitale teknikker er formet af et teoretisk udgangspunkt hos Bruno Latour. Artiklen undersøger, hvilke metodiske retningslinjer der følger af en Latour-inspireret forståelse af politik og demokrati. Først afsøges Latours inspirationskilder i den amerikanske pragmatisme. Dernæst diskuteres Noortje Marres’ bud på konsekvenserne for digitale metoder. Endelig analyseres betalingsringskontroversen for at give et eksempel på en undersøgelse med digitale metoder, der tager udgangspunkt i idéen om demokratisk offentlighed som noget, der opstår i anledning af konkrete problematiske sager. Analysen bygger på 4.500 posts og kommentarer fra syv forskellige Facebook-sider om betalingsringen, der opsummeres i en co-wordvisualisering. Artiklen fremfører, at et Latour-inspireret fokus på sagsorienterede offentligheder tilbyder et interessant alternativ til affejende begreber som shitstorms og ekkokamre, og diskuterer de metodiske udfordringer, som tilgangen medfører for digitale metoder.
ENGELSK ABSTRACT Andreas Birkbak: Shit storms, bubbles or issue publics? Digital methods and controversies on social media The controversy around plans to introduce congestion charges in Copenhagen included a number of protest pages on Facebook. This is not unique since social media are often used for popular protests these days. With the rise of digital methods, sociology has obtained a number of tools for collecting data about such protests. Several of the digital techniques are inspired by the work of Bruno Latour. This article investigates the methodological challenges that arise from a Latour-inspired understanding of politics and democracy. First, Latour’s inspiration from American pragmatism is explored. Next, Noortje Marres’s arguments about the consequences for digital methods are discussed. Finally, the congestion charge controversy is analyzed in order to provide an example of an inquiry with digital methods that is based on the idea that publics emerge in relation to problematic issues. The analysis is based on 4,500 posts and comments from seven different Facebook pages about the congestion charge controversy. The article argues that a Latour-inspired focus on issue-oriented publics offers an interesting alternative to sweeping concepts like shit storms and echo chambers, and explores the methodological challenges that the approach entails for digital methods. Keywords: Digital methods, Facebook, publics, controversy, Latour, congestion charges
Referencer
Alexander, Jeffrey C. 2006: The Civil Sphere. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195162509.001.0001
Bakshy, Eytan, Itamar Rosenn, Cameron Marlow and Lada Adamic 2012: »The Role of Social Networks in Information Diffusion«. Proceedings of the 21st World Wide Web Conference 2012. Lyon, April 16-20.
Beck, Gerald and Cordula Kropp 2011: »Infrastructures of Risk: A Mapping Approach towards Controversies on Risks.« Journal of Risk Research, Nr. 1, 2011:1-16.
Birkbak, Andreas 2017a: »When Financial Concerns Shape Traffic Policy: How Economic Assumptions Muted the Copenhagen Payment Zone Issue«. Science as Culture, Nr. 4, 2017:491-504.
Birkbak, Andreas 2017b: »Unscrewing Social Media Networks, Twice«. Academic Quarter /Akademisk Kvarter, Nr 1, 2017.
Birkbak, Andreas and Hjalmar Bang Carlsen 2016: »The Public and its Algorithms: Comparing and Experimenting with Calculated Publics« in V. Piotukh and L. Amoore (eds): Algorithmic Life – Calculative Devices in the Age of Big Data. London: Routledge.
Birkbak, Andreas og Anders Kristian Munk 2017: Digitale metoder. København: Hans Reitzel.
Blok, Anders 2007: »Naturkapitalens kultur: Om strategisk miljøforskning og miljøøkonomi i Danmark« i Holm, J., L.K. Petersen, J. Læssøe, A. Remmen, og C.J. Hansen (red.): Økologisk modernisering på dansk: Brug og bevægelser i miljøindsatsen. København: Frydenlund Academic.
Blok, Anders 2012: »Et nyt klima for sociologien? Om socialteoretiske nybrud i økologiseringens tidsalder«. Dansk Sociologi, Nr. 1, 2012:9-28.
Callon, Michel, Jean-Pierre Courtial, William A. Turner and Serge Bauin 1983: »From Translations to Problematic Networks: An Introduction to Co-Word Analysis«. Information (International Social Science Council), Nr. 2, 1983:191-235.
Cardon, Dominique 2017: »How to Rank the Web? Competition among Metrics of Digital Information« in Douay, N. and A. Wan (eds): Big Data & Civic Engagement. Milano: Planum.
Cherubini, Federica and Lucas Graves 2016: The Rise of Fact-Checking Sites in Europe. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
Dewey, John 1938: Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wiston.
Dewey, John 2017[1927]: Offentligheden og dens problemer. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Elm, Malin Sveningsson 2009: »How Do Various Notions of Privacy Influence Decisions in Qualitative Internet Research?« in Markham, A. and N. Baym (eds): Internet inquiry: conversations about method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ess, Charles 2002: »Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee.« Chicago, IL: Association of Internet Researchers.
Gerlitz, Carolin and Anne Helmond 2013: »The Like Economy: Social Buttons and the DataIntensive Web«. New Media & Society, Nr. 8, 2013:1348-1365.
Goodwin, Jean 2014: »Walter Lippmann, the Indispensable Opposition« in Jackson, Brian and Gregory Clark (eds): Trained Capacities: John Dewey, Rhetoric, and Democratic Practice. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
Habermas, Jürgen 2009[1967]: Borgerlig Offentlighed. København: Informations Forlag.
Hendricks, Vincent F. and Pelle G. Hansen 2014: Infostorms: How to Take Information Punches and Save Democracy. New York: Copernicus.
Huse, Tone 2015: »On Working Relations with the Citizen«. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, Nr. 1, 2015:49-73.
Latour, Bruno 2003: »What If We Talked Politics a Little?«. Contemporary Political Theory, Nr. 2, 2003:143-64. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300092
Latour, Bruno 2005a: »From Realpolitik to Dingpolitik or How to Make Things Public« in Latour, B. and P. Weibel (eds): Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Latour, Bruno 2005b: Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Latour, Bruno 2007: »Turning Around Politics A Note on Gerard de Vries’ Paper«. Social Studies of Science, Nr. 5, 2007:811-20.
Latour, Bruno 2011: »Networks, Societies, Spheres: Reflections of an Actor-Network Theorist«. International Journal of Communication, Nr. 5, 2011:796-810.
Lindgren, Simon and Fredrik Palm 2011: Textometrica Service Package. Web-applikation. Umeå: HUMlab. Kan tilgås på http://textometrica.humlab.umu.se.
Lippmann, Walter 1922: Public Opinion. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Lippmann, Walter 1925: The Phantom Public. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
LISIS 2015: CorTexT. Web-applikation. Université Paris-Est: Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire Sciences Innovations Sociétés (LISIS). Kan tilgås på https://www.cortext.net/.
Marres, Noortje 2005: »Issues Spark a Public into Being.« in Latour, B. and P. Weibel (eds): Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marres, Noortje 2007: »The Issues Deserve More Credit«. Social Studies of Science, Nr. 5, 2007:759-80.
Marres, Noortje 2012a: Material Participation: Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137029669
Marres, Noortje 2012b: »The Redistribution of Methods: On Intervention in Digital Social Research, Broadly Conceived.« The Sociological Review 60(S1):139-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02121.x
Marres, Noortje 2015: »Why Map Issues? On Controversy Analysis as a Digital Method«. Science, Technology & Human Values. Nr. 5, 2015:655-686.
Marres, Noortje 2017: Digital Sociology: The Reinvention of Social Research. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Marres, Noortje and Richard Rogers 2005: »Recipe for Tracing the Fate of Issues and Their Publics on the Web« in Latour, B. and P. Weibel (eds): Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Meilstrup, Per 2012: »Oprøret mod betalingsringen er et medieskabt falsum«. Berlingske Tidende, d. 18. januar.
Mortensen, Thomas Mikkel 2015: »Jensens Bøfhus taber millioner på Facebook-storm«. Berlingske Business, d. 18. juni.
Munk, Anders Kristian, Tommaso Venturini, and Axel Meunier 2018: »Data Sprints: A Collaborative Format in Digital Controversy Mapping« in Vertesi, J. and D. Ribes. (eds): Digital STS : A Handbook and Fieldguide, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Pariser, Eli 2012: The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web is Changing What We Read and How We Think. New York: Penguin Press.
Rekling, Therese 2014: »Styrket demokrati eller Facebook-tyranni?«. Berlingske Tidende, d. 15. februar. 3. sektion, side 10.
Rieder, Bernhard 2013: »Studying Facebook via Data Extraction: The Netvizz Application«. Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Web Science Conference, WebSci ’13, Paris, 2.-4. maj 2013.
Rogers, Richard and Noortje Marres 2000: »Landscaping Climate Change: A Mapping Technique for Understanding Science and Technology Debates on the World Wide Web.« Public Understanding of Science, 9(2):141-63.
Schudson, Michael 2008: »The ‘Lippmann-Dewey Debate’ and the Invention of Walter Lippmann as an Anti-Democrat 1985-1996.« International Journal of Communication, Nr. 2, 2008:1031-1042.
S-SF 2010: »Fair Løsning«. Rapport. København: Socialdemokraterne og Socialistisk Folkeparti. Senest tilgået 24. oktober 2015 på https://www.s-dialog.dk/download. aspx?docId=318395.
Sunstein, Cass R. 2006: Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sunstein, Cass R. 2007: Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Venturini, Tommaso 2012: »Building on Faults: How to Represent Controversies with Digital Methods.« Public Understanding of Science, 21(7).
Venturini, Tommaso 2010: »Diving in Magma: How to Explore Controversies with ActorNetwork Theory.« Public Understanding of Science, 19(3).
Zimmer, Michael 2010: »‘But the Data Is Already Public’: On the Ethics of Research in Facebook.« Ethics and Information Technology, 12(4):313-25.
