Event Title

Packaging Hashtags; Understanding Participatory Culture

Presenter Information

Nicholas DeArmas
Wendy Givoglu, University of Central Florida
Jennifer Miller
David Moran
Stephanie Vie, University of Central Florida

Location

CB1-120

Start Date

4-11-2017 8:15 AM

End Date

4-11-2017 9:45 AM

Description

Packaging Hashtags for (re)Composition: Rhetorical Velocity and Topoii in the Invention of Hashtags (Nicholas DeArmas)

In a recent interview for HASTAC's Interview Collections, Dr. Moya Bailey discussed how she values social media as a research utility, because it gives her "access to what people are thinking and feeling in real time" along with "very immediate 'audience studies'" (Sperrazza para. 14). Bailey's acknowledgment of the contributions that social media can provide academia hits close to home for the digital humanities, as it is a nexus between digital technology and humanities research. Social media can provide bridges between disciplines, scholars, and distances that could have never before been possible. One of the most effective facilitators for discourse and research made through social media is the hashtag. When used as rhetorical tools, hashtags unite research, make topical associations, spark discourse communities, organize activism, and spread awareness. I agree with Dr. Bailey and believe that, in the future, the discourse we conduct in the digital humanities will increasingly take place not housed in buildings spread out across campuses, but across digital space housed in metadata like hashtags. Considering the research of Bruns (2015), Caleffi (2015), Marwick and boyd (2011), Ridolfo and Divoss (2009), and Zappavinga (2015), my roundtable discussion will consider how hashtags enable the formation of ad-hoc discourse communities, ones whose discourse are often signified by the actual hashtag name itself. My research will draw upon the intersection between linguistics and rhetoric, in order to look at how the selection of a hashtag name often signals the topoii of the discourse that takes place by its participants. The dataset I'll use will be a month-long sample of the trending terms from ten major American cities (which is also one of the focal points of my dissertation). I'll be using a Grounded Theory Methodology for my research performed on Twitter. Through considering the linguistic aspects of hashtag names, and the dataset of what trends over the course of a month across America, my discussion will point to how certain linguistic patterns are more effective for hashtags; these rhetorical conventions should be recommended when inventing hashtags whose intent include increased rhetorical velocity. Said in a less academic voice, my roundtable discussion will use my data from trending terms on Twitter to argue for how hashtags can be better packaged for increased exposure. If the future of the digital humanities includes interdisciplinary conversations, and if those conversations are going to take place by employing metadata like hashtags, then the digital humanities needs to continue to perform research, like this, on the rhetorical tools they use to communicate their research. In this way, the communication of knowledge through digital means will be more effective, making the interdisciplinary conversations that take place in the digital humanities more productive.

Understanding Participatory Culture through Hashtag Activism After the Orlando Pulse Tragedy (Nicholas DeArmas, Wendy Givoglu, Jennifer Miller, David Moran and Stephanie Vie)

On June 12, 2016, a hate crime took place during Latin Night at a queer club in Orlando, Florida. The violent attack at Pulse nightclub left 49 people dead and 53 injured from gunfire. Almost immediately, social media posts began to proliferate that incorporated hashtags like #OrlandoStrong, #OrlandoUnited, and #OnePulse. Why do many of us reach toward our screens when tragedy strikes? In times of despair, such networked connections may serve to console and strengthen people, potentially linking different perspectives into a common, communicative channel. However, dynamics of power, privilege, and oppression often shape social media narratives, framing them according to the proximity of users' social norms, identities, and ideological beliefs. The narrative of the Pulse tragedy (which should have demonstrated the identities and lived experiences of LGBTQ+ people, more specifically queer and trans people of color) selectively included or excluded specific perspectives from social media discourses, despite the fact that these marginalized groups were the most directly impacted and affected by the targeted violence. These voices, implicitly delegitimized by institutions upholding and continually ingraining hegemonic ideals of American citizenship, worked together in digital spaces to steer and diversify the evolving narratives of the Pulse tragedy. Since June 12, LGBTQ+ locals in tandem with Central Florida residents, the American public, and the international community have left a massive digital archive of their experiences: organizing to mourn, performing humanitarianism, and mobilizing into a critical mass to protest. Unfortunately, across the world, tragedies occur regularly; a variety of publics within and across larger communities are leveraging social media along with digital skills to respond as prosumers or active participants who both consume and produce content (Jenkins, 2008; Potts, 2013). This is also true for the Pulse tragedy, as a diverse range of participatory voices responded to and shaped its conception via hashtags, awareness ribbon memes, arts-based overlays, activism, and direct action. The authors, affiliated with UCF in Orlando, Florida, documented and analyzed these participatory responses on Twitter. Using a combination of grounded theory methodology (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin, 1990; Wolff, 2015) and critical discourse analysis (Huckin, Andrus, & Clary-Lemon, 2012; Vaara, 2014; Van Dijk, 2001), the research team coded a dataset of over 1,000 Tweets containing #OrlandoStrong, #OrlandoUnited, and #OnePulse—analyzing narrative patterns as they were discovered in the data as befitting grounded theory analysis, while categorizing visual and textual social media posts associated with the tragedy. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) was used because it examines "how those in power use discourse and contexts to form shared cognitions that contribute to people's perception of normality" (Vie, Balzhiser, & Fitzgerald Ralston, 2014). Van Dijk (2001) described how CDA is used to examine control of access to discourse, control of discourse interactions and structures, and then control of contexts and strategies that contribute to shared thoughts and values. Thus, reflecting on the experiences of the researchers, tweets were recursively axial-coded with respect for the narratives they (de)legitimized (Vaara, 2014) and the language that reflected shared thoughts and values (Van Dijk, 2001).