| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.78 MB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Over the past fourteen years, Facebook has grown from a social network site for elite
college students in the United States, to its current position as a dominant global
hub for online sociality; a platform for an ever-increasing range of daily activities,
and a staple in efforts to arrange and coordinate local civic initiatives (Bennett and
Segerberg, 2011; Bennett and Segerberg, 2012; Crivellaro et al., 2014; Berns et al.,
2019). Civic and people-led initiatives sometimes express opposition to the val ues that Facebook is perceived to represent, or explicitly seek out alternatives to
the platform. Yet, the lack of dedicated budgets, together with initiatives’ concern
to gain visibility, often result in the adoption of Facebook – and arguably other social media platforms – to mobilize resources, plan collective actions and coordi nate them, or to manage both internal and external communication (Tayebi, 2013; Costanza-Chock, 2020). In this chapter, we examine how five different, community, bottom-up initiatives
across Europe use Facebook, the reasons for choosing this platform, and what kind
of challenges arise from adopting it. Rejecting polarizing narratives – of social media
as the sole instrument of social change, on the one hand, and pessimistic views of
surveillance and mistrust, on the other – we draw attention to how these narratives
do, or do not, play into use in practice. In doing so, we focus on the tensions
that stem from using Facebook as a platform for community initiatives, not at the
theoretical level of media studies, but by analysing the situated use of the platform
on the ground.
We do this through five empirical case studies: a network for self-organizing co working days in homes in Sweden (Hoffice), migrant solidarity grassroots groups (Migration Aid) in Hungary, short-let accommodation for foreign volunteers in Greece (Athens Volunteers’ Accommodation and Ride-sharing), a neighborhood centered community group in England (Egg Club), and a cycling promotion group in Portugal (Cicloficina do Porto). With a strong emphasis on practices of care among those involved – both for oneself and others – the cases provide alternative visions to what have become mainstream examples of platforms, and platform use, in the colllaborative economy. Rather than adopting bespoke digital technologies to advance their causes, all five cases rely primarily on Facebook.
Description
Under the COST ACTION CA16121 Sharing and Caring: Examining the Socio-technical aspects of the Collaborative Economy, funded by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology)
Keywords
Facebook Social media platforms Community bottom-up innitiatives
Citation
Publisher
Now Publishers