The dynamics and potentials of big data for audience research

Abstract

This article considers the future of audience research in an era of big data. It does so by interrogating the dynamics and potentials of the big data paradigm in an era of usergenerated content and commercial exploitation. In this context, it is proposed that the major dynamics of big data are a conjoint application of numerology and alchemy in the information age. On this basis, the potentials of new data techniques are addressed in light of the critical gap between audience data and the audiences themselves. Audience research has entered the era of 'big data', a paradigm emerging from two decades of innovative and aggressive information management. In the context of this data arcadia, the need to reconsider our epistemological premise may be less apparent than the sudden expansion of the methodological toolkit, but it is no less pressing. With this in mind, my proposition is that we need to consider both the dynamics and the potentials of such techniques. Media dynamics are determined in this instance as the presumptions, imperatives and motives that shape the paradigm itself, along with the interaction of

fuerza de un signo. Perspectivas teóricas para el análisis de los hashtags #

“…Por tanto, cuando analizamos los datos extraídos de las redes sociales e indexados mediante el uso de hashtags, debemos tener en cuenta la importancia de la construcción social del hashtag y los significados que le subyacen. Lo mismo ha de hacerse si los usamos para el análisis de audiencias (Athique, 2018) que para el de eventos catastróficos (Matheson, 2018). En los dos casos, los hashtag nacen con una atribución de sentido particular, pero que cambia a través de la interacción, desarrollando y enriqueciendo los "posibles seres" de cada hashtag.…”

Büyük Veriye İletişimsel Yaklaşımlar: Web of Science Yayınlarının Sistematik Bir Analizi

“…Bu bağlamda üçüncü bulgu, makalelerin büyük veriden araştırmalar yoluyla elde edilecek çıktıların niteliğini bireyselden toplumsala geniş bir yelpaze içerisinde yarar ve zarar karşıtlığı ekseninde tartışıyor olmalarıdır. Söz konusu tartışma çerçevesinde kimi yazarların (Arsenault, 2017;Fairfield, & Shtein 2014;Kelly, 2019;Kshetri, 2014;Zimmer, 2018) birey/ grup/kamu/toplum ayrımı yapmadan, yararı en çoklaştırmak için zararı en aza indirgeme kaygısıyla hareket ettikleri, kimi yazarların ise (Athique, 2018;Couldry & Turow, 2014;Halavais, 2015;Light, Mitchell, & Wikström, 2018;Willson, & Leaver, 2015) bu kategoriler arasında belli önceliklerin belirlenmesi gerektiğine vurgu yaparak bunların evrensel nitelikte ilkelere dönüştürülmesinde ısrarcı oldukları görülmüştür. Yazarların bu ısrarlarının gerisinde iki önceliğin yattığı belirlenmiştir: İlki, yeni yeni deneyimlenen büyük veri olgusuna ilişkin olarak örneğin reklam-pazarlama-halkla ilişkiler (Arsenault, 2017;Chen, & Zhou, 2018;Couldry, & Turow, 2014) ya da gazetecilik (Broussard, 2016;Guo, Vargo, Pan, Ding, & Ishwar, 2016;Hammond, 2017;Lewis et al, 2013;Parasie, 2015;Sandoval-Martin & La-Rosa, 2018;Yang, 2016) gibi mesleki pratikler ekseninde etik ilkelerin belirlenmesinde araştırmayı uygulayanlar yanında araştırmaya konu olan bireylerin de söz hakkı olması (bilgilendirmeye dayalı rıza gibi) gerektiğidir (Baruh, & Popescu, 2017;Couldry, & Turow, 2014;Fairfield, & Shtein 2014;Light, Mitchell, & Wikström, 2018;Zimmer, 2018).…”

Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media: Towards Theorising Public Lives on Private Platforms

“…For scholars concerned primarily with the dynamics and nuances of people's social media participation and content production, digital intimacies can be understood as constitutive of a kind of social capital that structures experiences and mobilisations of intimacy, identity, and belonging, and that can be mobilised potentially into other kinds of capital (Hopkins and Ryan, 2014;Harvey and Ringrose, 2015;Lambert, 2016;Abidin, 2018;Raun, 2018;Berryman and Kavka, 2018;Dobson, this volume). When people's sharing practices are viewed primarily in relation to the commercial business models of social media, intimate communication can be seen as a kind of free labour (Terranova, 2000;Andrejevic, 2009;Jarrett, 2016;Attique, 2017). That is, the media practices involved in the doing of intimacy online double as the generation of valuable content, attention, social networks, and data.…”