CAN YOU DIGIT? DIGITAL SOCIOLOGY’S VOCATIONAL PROMISE

Stephen Barnard St. Lawrence University@socsavvy

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Guiding Insights “In the final analysis,

the problems that we identify and resolve through technological innovation will always be essentially human concerns which engender characteristically human solutions. Much the same can be said for the practice of sociology.”

-Adrian Athique 2013: 263

Image Credit

“media do not simply add a new element to the story, they transform it”

-Livingstone 2009:8)

Goals of the paper…

To make the case for a more digitally-attuned sociology, and to forge a path in that direction.

Here’s how:1. I begin with a brief history of digital sociology—in the

U.S. and beyond—as well as a survey of other, related approaches that have gained greater traction in the field.”

2. I examine the state of social life in the digitally networked era and make the case for sociology’s need to update its epistemological orientation to put an end to fetishisms of technology and the “real world.

3. I outline an agenda for the future of digital sociology along with some suggestions for how it might be accomplished.

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

When I started grad school, I dreamt of a true commitment to (Digital) Media Sociology…

Part my concern was with traditional media

And the other part was with citizenship and digital media

Image: Associated Press Image: Associated Press

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

By time I left grad school, networked classrooms looked like this

Image credit: Chris Corwin

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

On the wrong side of our own ‘digital divide’Digital Humanities has really taken off…

While the potential for sociology is still right at our fingertips…

Image creditImage credit

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

“Digital Humanities” has really taken off

Figure 1: Google Ngram of book references to “digital humanities”

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Digital Sociology is behind, but showing promise Especially in the U.S.

Only 2 references to “digital sociology” in the Social Science Citation Index

Still, there is a lot of good, digitally-attuned sociology digital inequality and literacy

(Hargittai, 2010; Hughey and Daniels, 2013; Schradie 2011), digital culture and interaction

(Boyd, 2014; Marwick, 2012; Trottier 2013, Papacharissi 2010), networked society and social movements

(Castells, 2013; Rainie and Wellman, 2012; Earl and Kimport, 2011),

medical sociology and the quantified self (Lupton, 2014), political sociology (Kriess, 2014), media sociology, etc.

(Benson et al., 2012; Gillespie et al., 2014; Waisbord 2014)

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Lessons from the Digital Humanities DH is inclusive and interdisciplinary Still, dialectics of inclusion and exclusion

exist …and they are destructive and distracting

Beware of buzzwords, determinism, and fetishism

DH is primarily a methodological intervention

But, digital interventions have also opened up entire new issues for the humanities, as they have for sociology

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Two types of Digitality for SociologyDigital Scholarship

Scholarship of the Digital

scholarly work that leverages digital tools in the process of academic inquiry. data collection

content from social media platforms or other web sites

online surveys other forms of digital data, however

“big” methods

social network analysis digital ethnography collaborative coding

publication outlets blogs social media platforms paper sharing sites open-access publications

the explicit consideration and analysis of issues arising from the proliferation of digital technologies. In and around sociology,

there is work on internet studies, digital inequality, augmented reality, media logic, and mediation/mediatization, among many others

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

The Reality of Digitality

We live in a Networked Society Castells 2009;

Rainie and Wellman 2012

Social relations are “augmented” by technology usage Jurgenson 2012;

Coleman 2011

A Tale of Two Fetishisms

Technology Fetishism Fetishism of the “Real Life”

Fetishism “the habit humans have of

endowing real or imagined objects or entities with self-contained, mysterious, and even magical powers to move and shape the world in distinctive ways” (Harvey, 2003)

Characteristics: Utopian celebration;

Technological determinism; ignorant of political-economy

Sites of struggle Big Data

It’s great, but relying on pre-selected, structured data has costs

Jurgenson’s Lexicon and the “IRL fetish” resists changes in culture and

technology by fetishizing that which is the apparent antithesis of technology, human sociality, and by constructing a dualistic view of reality, digital versus physical (Jurgenson 2012)

Characteristics: Utopian celebration of f2f; Vintage

nostalgia; separation fallacy;

Sites of Struggle Digital Dualism vs. Augmented

Reality Atoms and Bits

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Waking up to the Digital World

DS is more than just

“Add digital data and stir”

It will take shifts in ontology and epistemology, theory and method, research questions and data collection, etc.

If we are not of and with members of society, then we can hardly expect to characterize them fairly or accurately in our research (Gans, 2014; cf. Barnard and Van Gerven, 2009)

Image Credit

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

Four issues DS must address1) Update our analytical orientation

Ontologies, epistemologies, methodologies Better account for the networked world

2) Keep structure and agency in balance Resist deterministic and fetishistic frames Leveraged affordances (Earl and Kimport, 2012) and mutual

shaping (Trottier 2013) are steps in the right direction

3) Preserve meaning and thick description in the age of big data

Strive to maintain context; don’t forget the hard, interpretive work

Consider observational biases, interests and power relations

4) Broaden our definitions…of teaching, scholarship, service, and even sociology

We live in a complex, hybrid world Our practices should be more…practical

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

In every great challenge lies great opportunity The hybridity of fields and practices in the networked era

presents a valuable opportunity to reevaluate sociology’s vocational promise.

While sociology has historically been attuned to viewing the world as a commingling of agents and interactions with/in institutional contexts, it is also possible for sociological approaches to recognize the emergence of a digital, hypermediated superstructure that augments traditional social relations. Just as actors in other fields have developed networked practices

and dispositions to suit changes to the media environment (Barnard forthcoming; Papacharissi and Easton 2013), sociologists can (and should) adapt to living and researching in a networked society.

A critical mass of society’s members (including many sociologists) belong to the networked public. We should listen to the members and start giving digital developments the attention they deserve.

Closing remarks: we must attend to the digital worldAfter all, other disciplines

are likeWhile a majority of sociologists still have our heads buried in the sand

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence UniversityImage credit

Image credit

Stephen Barnard | @socsavvy | St. Lawrence University

THANK YOU…I look forward to

comments and questions