2016
DOI: 10.1177/0963947016652785
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Moderating readers and reading online

Abstract: Despite the proliferation of online forums for the discussion of literary texts, very little has been written to date on the management of these spaces and how this helps frame the kinds of discussion and interpretative work that take place. This article draws on a series of interviews with moderators of online book-related sites, alongside close analysis of online interactions between moderators and users to consider issues of authority, hierarchy, power and control, asking how these act to structure or facil… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For the even more dedicated, group reads of the letters also take place. (Thomas and Round, 2016: 245)…”
Section: 2 ‘Re-reading’ In Published Stylistic Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the even more dedicated, group reads of the letters also take place. (Thomas and Round, 2016: 245)…”
Section: 2 ‘Re-reading’ In Published Stylistic Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 4. See Thomas and Round (2016) for more on digital public reading of Austen. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We need to be careful in generalizing about readers' behaviours, since the texts and the readers on Wattpad are only a subgroup of all kind of literary texts and readers. The young age of Wattpad users and their still relative small cultural capital may affect the way they talk about books, as it also happens in other kinds of digital platforms [8,123,124]. Moreover, it should be kept in mind that we did not focus on the response of individual readers, we rather created a statistical model of a collective response to stories.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%