RESEARCH

Summary

My work broadly covers the cultural, social, and policy implications of emerging technologies, primarily social media. I am interested in how social media makes large audiences available to individuals, and how these audiences affect identity, self-presentation, and interpersonal relationships. Currently, I am researching disinformation and far-right subcultures online and conducting fieldwork for my second monograph (on networked privacy and marginalized populations).

I am a qualitative social scientist located primarily in the subfield of Internet Studies, with my main discipline being Communication and Media Studies. My methods include ethnography, interviews, focus groups, discourse analysis, and cultural studies. I like multimethodological work and enjoy working with critical, interpretive, qualitative, and quantitative scholars.

If you’ve never read any of my work, my most-cited paper (by far) is “I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience.” Here’s the PDF.

My current research areas are:

  • Far-right subcultures, disinformation, and online harassment
  • Privacy and surveillance
  • Microcelebrity and consumer culture

FAR-RIGHT SUBCULTURES, DISINFORMATION, and ONLINE HARASSMENT

I am interested in far-right extremist subcultures, primarily the alt-right and the Men’s Rights Movement, and how they use social media to spread propaganda, manipulate mainstream media, and conduct systemic harassment. Given that most social media technologies were based on idealistic visions of human interaction, they are easily exploited by bad actors. Institutions like journalism and academia have been slow to adapt, and their adherence to practices developed in the age of broadcast media has, for the most part, allowed them to be exploited very efficiently and ruthlessly by extremist groups. For instance, the emphasis on “free speech” on platforms like Reddit and Twitter has made them rife with hateful speech and harassment, while the mainstream media’s desire to show “both sides of the story” has allowed white supremacist and misogynist points of view to be positioned as equally valid as anti-racist and feminist perspectives.

My most recent work examines why people share fake news. I maintain that people primarily share news stories online to express their identity. In a very polarizing time in America, partisan identity often reflects social class, family, and environment. In other words, the political is personal. As a result, solving the “fake news” problem is not simply a matter of media literacy or fact-checking; it requires delving into the conspiratorial thinking and hatred of opposition parties that is spreading across both the left and the right.

Fake news, disinformation, and media manipulation:

  • Marwick, A. “Why Do People Share Fake News? A Sociotechnical Model of Media Effects.” Georgetown Law Technology Review. [in review; I’ll post a final version when it’s done.]
  • “Taking the Red Pill: Ideological Motivations for Spreading Online Disinformation.” (with Becca Lewis). Understanding and Addressing the Disinformation Ecosystem, University of Pennsylvania Annenberg School for Communication, Philadelphia, PA, Lewis, December 15 – 16, 2017. [PDF]
  • Marwick, A. and Lewis, B. (2017). Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online. New York: Data & Society Research Institute. [Open Access]

The Men’s Rights Movement and gendered harassment:

  • Marwick, A. & Caplan, R. (2018). “Drinking Male Tears: Language, the Manosphere, and Networked Harassment.” Feminist Media Studies. Published online before print. [Link] [PDF]
  • Marwick, A. (2017). “Scandal or Sex Crime? Gendered Privacy and the Celebrity Nude Photo Leaks.” Ethics and Information Technology, 19(3), 177-191. [Link] [PDF]

Online harassment:

  • Marwick, A., Blackwell, L., & Lo, K. (2016). Best Practices for Conducting Risky Research and Protecting Yourself from Online Harassment (Data & Society Guide). New York: Data & Society Research Institute. [Open Access]
  • Marwick, A. and Miller, R. (2014, June 10). “Online Harassment, Defamation, and Hateful Speech: A Primer of the Legal Landscape.” Fordham Center on Law and Information Policy Report No. 2, Fordham Law School, New York, NY. [Open Access]
  • Marwick, A. (2013). “There’s No Justice Like Angry Mob Justice: Regulating Hate Speech through Internet Vigilantism.” Selected Papers of Internet Research 14.0. Denver, CO: October 24-27. [Open Access]

 

ONLINE PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE

My motivation in researching online privacy is to interrogate victim-blaming discourses that maintain that privacy violations are the fault of the victim, whether for putting “too much” information online or not protecting themselves appropriately. In contrast, I have been working out a theory of networked privacy that maintains that privacy violations are inevitable as a result of the social connections made possible by social media, the technical affordances of platforms, and large-scale data-mining and surveillance. These violations are inevitably most difficult for people marginalized in other areas of their lives, meaning that privacy should be seen as a social justice issue. My focus so far in this area has been socio-economic status, although my current research discusses gendered privacy which examines “revenge porn,” harassment, doxing, and nude photo leaks as privacy issues that are more likely to happen to women, nonbinary, trans, and queer folks.

Other recent work interrogates the privacy paradox, which basically asks why people claim to care about their privacy while posting personal data online. I find this line of questioning quite frustrating. Information provision online is not and should not be a proxy of privacy concern. This ignores the vast social benefits that participating online provides, and it ignores the fact that people delineate between information like health data, credit card numbers, nude photos etc. and social information (pictures, birthday, likes and dislikes). I am also interested in the privacy calculus literature, which maintains that people make a cost-benefit decision when providing information. My two papers with Eszter Hargittai suggests that people think privacy violations are inevitable, and instead do what they can to mitigate their impact.​

Privacy and Marginalized Individuals

Networked Privacy, Privacy Practices, and the Privacy Paradox

Surveillance Studies

  • Marwick, A. (2016). “Online Consumers and Big Data.” Key Issues In Big Data Surveillance Research Workshop, 12-14 May 2016, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. [PDF]
  • Marwick, A. (2014). “How Your Data Are Being Deeply Mined.” New York Review of Books, January 9. [paywall, but sometimes open] [PDF]
  • Marwick, A. (2012). “The Public Domain: Social Surveillance in Everyday Life.” Surveillance and Society 9(4).  [Open access]

 

MICROCELEBRITY and CONSUMER CULTURE

[coming soon]