Search

Geomedia, representing an epochal shift in spatial mediations and spatialized media, changes daily life. This future-directed thematic issue advocates for contextualized understandings of geomedia that transcend contemporary hegemonic representations of technology. It recognizes the transformative powers of geomediatization processes and asks what “geomedia futures” such processes might bring about. Bridging critical geomedia studies and critical future studies, it challenges dominant narratives about tomorrow’s technological society and promotes the exploration of diverse, equitable, and sustainable futures with and under geomedia. Through numerous methodological approaches, the collected articles examine the role of geomedia in contexts such as urban planning, tourism, surveillance, governance, and policy. The thematic issue emphasizes the importance of envisioning alternative futures that resist technological rationalization and unethical exploitation of geospatial data, supporting more inclusive and human-centered mediatized places. This work contributes to ongoing debates in geomedia studies, highlighting the need for critical and interdisciplinary approaches to understand and shape our technological future.

This study explores the visual representation of Great Yarmouth, a British coastal town caught between the urban and the rural, as seen through the quasi-monopolistic image search engine Google Images. The research examines levels of pluralistic or biased place representations to consider how rankings employed by Google Images algorithms represent Great Yarmouth’s identity. The study adopts a visual culture perspective that recognises the role of images in place making and combines digital methods with an image type analysis to investigate how online representations reflect and create the town’s identities. The data shows that Google Images’ preference for representing Yarmouth as a sunny seaside town indicates that the search engine prioritises marketable assets above its connections with its hinterland, its diversity of people, and the cultural activities it has to offer. This, the authors state, is a place far away from Tuan’s (1979) idea of a place that is given meaning and identity from the perspective of people. Instead, Google Images’ representations of Great Yarmouth are an example of a created form of place making as commodification. The article concludes that the inscribed bias and unbalanced search priority criteria employed by the search engine impact upon the diversity of the semi-peripheral town.

The diffusion of algorithms, robots, and artificial intelligence has sparked public debates regarding opportunities, risks, and responsibility for addressing problems and developing solutions. Since media cover and shape sociotechnical imaginaries, this study investigates the Austrian media discourses on responsibility in two domains of automation: social media algorithms and social companions. Using a machine learning approach, relevant articles were identified, followed by a manual comparative content analysis. The findings indicate that media coverage of social media algorithms tends to be more critical compared to social companions. In the debate about social media algorithms, journalists emerge as the most common speakers raising responsibility issues and primarily attributing them to Internet platform providers. Conversely, responsibility for social robotics is predominantly articulated by experts, considering it as a responsibility shared by society, economy, and research. Furthermore, the media present different perspectives on the agency and responsibility of social media algorithms and social robots themselves.

Images have become a key vehicle for communicating climate change, especially in a visually oriented social media ecosystem. However, few studies have examined the ways in which climate change is visually communicated on those platforms. This study addresses that gap by examining more than 2 million images appearing alongside tweets containing #climatechange, identifying the types of images different stakeholders share and the amount of engagement those images elicit. It highlights differences in the image types that are published frequently (e.g., textual visualizations), the image types that users prefer to engage with (e.g., protest images), and the impact of bots and a cyclical communication pattern keyed to focusing events. These findings are then evaluated through a conceptual framework of media logics, which helps highlight some of the distinctions between (news) media logic and social media logic-and their emerging hybridization-within the context of climate change communication.

This study explores the visual representation of Great Yarmouth, a British coastal town caught between the urban and the rural, as seen through the quasi-monopolistic image search engine Google Images. The research examines levels of pluralistic or biased place representations to consider how rankings employed by Google Images algorithms represent Great Yarmouth’s identity. The study adopts a visual culture perspective that recognises the role of images in place making and combines digital methods with an image type analysis to investigate how online representations reflect and create the town’s identities. The data shows that Google Images’ preference for representing Yarmouth as a sunny seaside town indicates that the search engine prioritises marketable assets above its connections with its hinterland, its diversity of people, and the cultural activities it has to offer. This, the authors state, is a place far away from Tuan’s (1979) idea of a place that is given meaning and identity from the perspective of people. Instead, Google Images’ representations of Great Yarmouth are an example of a created form of place making as commodification. The article concludes that the inscribed bias and unbalanced search priority criteria employed by the search engine impact upon the diversity of the semi-peripheral town.

The diffusion of algorithms, robots, and artificial intelligence is accompanied by public debates about opportunities and risks of automation and responsibility for problems and the development of solutions. Since media coverage plays a central role in shaping public perception of automation, this study examines the Austrian media discourses on responsibility in two automation fields: social media algorithms and social companions. The comparative content analysis reveals that social media algorithms are more critically covered than social companions. When it comes to social media algorithms, responsibility issues are often raised by journalists, and responsibility is primarily assigned to the Internet platforms. To the contrary, risks of social robotics are articulated predominantly by experts, and seen as challenges for society, economy, and research alike. Moreover, media provide different perspectives to the question whether algorithms in social media and social robots have agency and can assume responsibility themselves.

Das Schlüsselwerk von Drumwright und Murphy verweist einerseits auf die Vernachlässigung der Produzent*innenethik in der Werbeforschung und andererseits auf die Feststellung, dass viele Werbepraktiker*innen moralisch zu kurzsichtig sind, um sich mit Fragen ethischen Handelns zu beschäftigen oder stumm darin, ihre Bedenken zu äußern. Während theoretische und methodische Ansätze der Erforschung von Werbeethik generell rar sind, wird dies insbesondere für die Meso- und Makroebene betont. So sind organisationale Ansätze zur Erforschung der Werbeethik rar, wären jedoch geboten, da sie berücksichtigen können, inwiefern Organisationskulturen und -strukturen die ethische Entscheidungsfindung von Werber*innen beeinflussen. Das Schlüsselwerk zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass die Werbeethik aus Perspektive der Verhaltensethik und Organisationskultur analysiert wird, die Mikro- mit der Mesoebene verbindet und analytisch auch die Makroebene miteinbezieht., Drumwright and Murphy's key work points on the one hand to the neglect of producer ethics in advertising research and on the other hand to the observation that many advertising practitioners are morally too myopic to deal with questions of ethical action or mute in voicing their concerns. While theoretical and methodological approaches to researching advertising ethics are generally scarce, this is particularly emphasized for the meso and macro levels. Thus, organizational approaches to researching advertising ethics are rare, but would be warranted, as they can take into account the extent to which organizational cultures and structures influence the ethical decision-making of advertisers. The key text is characterized by analyzing advertising ethics from the perspective of behavioral ethics and organizational culture, linking the micro level with the meso level and analytically including the macro level.

At the end of October 2022, Elon Musk concluded his acquisition of Twitter. In the weeks and months before that, several questions were publicly discussed that were not only of interest to the platform's future buyers, but also of high relevance to the Computational Social Science research community. For example, how many active users does the platform have? What percentage of accounts on the site are bots? And, what are the dominating topics and sub-topical spheres on the platform? In a globally coordinated effort of 80 scholars to shed light on these questions, and to offer a dataset that will equip other researchers to do the same, we have collected all 375 million tweets published within a 24-hour time period starting on September 21, 2022. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first complete 24-hour Twitter dataset that is available for the research community. With it, the present work aims to accomplish two goals. First, we seek to answer the aforementioned questions and provide descriptive metrics about Twitter that can serve as references for other researchers. Second, we create a baseline dataset for future research that can be used to study the potential impact of the platform's ownership change.

The diffusion of algorithms, robots, and artificial intelligence has sparked public debates regarding opportunities, risks, and responsibility for addressing problems and developing solutions. Since media cover and shape sociotechnical imaginaries, this study investigates the Austrian media discourses on responsibility in two domains of automation: social media algorithms and social companions. Using a machine learning approach, relevant articles were identified, followed by a manual comparative content analysis. The findings indicate that media coverage of social media algorithms tends to be more critical compared to social companions. In the debate about social media algorithms, journalists emerge as the most common speakers raising responsibility issues and primarily attributing them to Internet platform providers. Conversely, responsibility for social robotics is predominantly articulated by experts, considering it as a responsibility shared by society, economy, and research. Furthermore, the media present different perspectives on the agency and responsibility of social media algorithms and social robots themselves.

Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich damit, wie historische Persönlichkeiten und Ereignisse als Ressource für das populärkulturelle Genre der Memes in digitalen Medienumgebungen genutzt und für politische Zwecke instrumentalisiert werden. Auf Basis einer qualitativen Inhaltsanalyse von über 150 Memes von vier sich als Satiregruppen bezeichnenden weit links- und weit rechtsstehenden Gruppierungen in Sozialen Medien identifizieren wir fünf Strategien des Einsatzes historischer Referenzen in Memes. Diese dienen 1) dem Revisionismus bzw. der (Neu-)Interpretation historischer Ereignisse, 2) der (Neu-)Bewertung historischer Persönlichkeiten, 3) der Verharmlosung historischer Ereignisse durch deren Bezug zu aktuellen Ereignissen oder umgekehrt 4) der Dramatisierung aktueller Ereignisse durch deren Bezug zu vergangenen Ereignissen und schließlich 5) der Artikulation radikaler politischer Argumente und deren Legitimation.

This article updates certain aspects of the normative notions of the public sphere. The complex ecosystem of social communications enhanced by mobile media platform activity has changed our perception of space. If the public sphere has to normatively assess the expected conditions for public debate and for democracy, the assemblage of devices, discourses, infrastructures, locations, and regulations must be considered together. The literature reviewed about the public sphere, spaces, and geographically-enabled mobile media leads this article to the formulation of a concept of the public sphere that considers such assemblage as an interface. As an empirically applicable update to the definition of the public sphere the text offers a model that helps analyze those factors considering how they shape the communicative space in four modes: representations, structures, textures, and connections. These modes consider the roles played by assemblages of devices, infrastructures, and content in delimiting the circulation of information. The second part of the article illustrates the model with examples from previous research, paying particular attention to the structures' mode. The dissection of qualitative, quantitative, and geodata generated by digital and (visual) (n)ethnographic tools reveals three subcategories for the analysis of structures of space: barriers, shifts, and flows. The structures effectively enable/disable communication and define centers and peripheries in the activity flows. The contribution of this article is, thus, conceptual - it challenges and updates the notion of the public sphere; and methodological - it offers tools and outputs that align with the previously developed theoretical framework.

Introduction to the edited volume

On November 2, 2020, Vienna, Austria, was hit by a terrorist attack. Countless photos and videos created by eyewitnesses were shared on social media and picked up by journalistic media. Especially the use of the images by two major Austrian media caused public outcry and an intensive media-ethical debate. The article focuses on the meta-journalistic discourse on visual communication norms spurred by the visual media coverage of the attack, what was criticized and by whom, and the consequences of the discourse. A variety of actors spoke out, accusing the two media outlets of showing attack images that violate journalistic codes. While there was a broad consensus among the discussants that showing the images was inappropriate in the journalistic context, the level of reflection was low. The discussion was limited to image motives, but the journalists and covered actors did not discuss the reasons for not publishing these visuals, the visuals’ aesthetics and modes of representation. Thus, how something is depicted was excluded from the debate.

To comprehensively understand online communication behavior, a theoretical framework applied must capture the whole range of ambivalence between toxic and prosocial forms of online engagement. Although the concept of the Online Disinhibition Effect (ODE) provides a useful ground, it is theoretically underdeveloped. Building on the ODE and adding relevant aspects through a literature review, we propose a comprehensive model consisting of three analytical dimensions: (1) (intra-)individual and social antecedents including personal traits, attitudes, group characteristics, and cultural contexts and values, (2) communication and media environments as antecedents comprising platform affordances as well as news characteristics, and (3) (situational) correlates which include individuals’ situational states as well as user interactions and dynamics. Our Online Communication Disinhibition Model (OCDM) is able to capture individual and public communication on diverse platforms and in different modalities and can be used to study disinhibition in various subdisciplines of media and communication studies.

On November 2, 2020, Vienna, Austria, was hit by a terrorist attack. Countless photos and videos created by eyewitnesses were shared on social media and picked up by journalistic media. Especially the use of the images by two major Austrian media caused public outcry and an intensive media-ethical debate. This paper focuses on the metajournalistic discourse on visual communication norms spurred by the visual media coverage of the attack, what was criticized and by whom, and the consequences of the discourse. A variety of actors spoke out, accusing the two media outlets of showing attack images that violate journalistic codes. While there was a broad consensus that showing the images was inappropriate in the journalistic context, the level of reflection was generally low. The discussion was limited to image motives, but their aesthetics and modes of representation were not discussed. Thus, how something is depicted and what implications these depictions have was not adequately addressed.

This article updates certain aspects of the normative notions of the public sphere. The complex ecosystem of social communications enhanced by mobile media platform activity has changed our perception of space. If the public sphere has to normatively assess the expected conditions for public debate and for democracy, the assemblage of devices, discourses, infrastructures, locations, and regulations must be considered together. The literature reviewed about the public sphere, spaces, and geographically-enabled mobile media leads this article to the formulation of a concept of the public sphere that considers such assemblage as an interface. As an empirically applicable update to the definition of the public sphere the text offers a model that helps analyze those factors considering how they shape the communicative space in four modes: representations, structures, textures, and connections. These modes consider the roles played by assemblages of devices, infrastructures, and content in delimiting the circulation of information. The second part of the article illustrates the model with examples from previous research, paying particular attention to the structures’ mode. The dissection of qualitative, quantitative, and geodata generated by digital and (visual) (n)ethnographic tools reveals three subcategories for the analysis of structures of space: barriers, shifts, and flows. The structures effectively enable/disable communication and define centers and peripheries in the activity flows. The contribution of this article is, thus, conceptual—it challenges and updates the notion of the public sphere; and methodological—it offers tools and outputs that align with the previously developed theoretical framework.

In the digital age, calls for transparency and openness as well as for privacy and confidentiality prevail: Struggles for visibility occur simultaneously with conflicts regarding invisibility and hidden battles for power and privileges of interpretation. Concerns about a loss of digital self-determination exist, just like those regarding the “right to be forgotten” or the right to become invisible and unseen. While the idea of a “transparent user” – as the ultimate notion of (in)voluntary visibility – has caused a broad outcry in society and in scientific debates a few years ago (Palfrey & Gasser, 2008), the discussion has shifted toward considerations of Internet governance and regulation (Camenisch, Fischer-Hübner, & Hansen, 2015). Brighenti (2010, p. 109) has pointed out that visibility has long been one of the key aspects “associated with the public sphere” and that in today’s digitized publics, the “project of democracy can no longer be imagined without taking into account visibility and its outcomes” (Brighenti, 2010, p. 189). Visibility and invisibility, along with their societal outcomes, are increasingly being discussed and analyzed, as they are becoming important dimensions in the accurate description and explanation of digital communication.

Presentation at the Annual Conference of the Visual Communication Division of the German Communication Association, Trier, Germany

The theory of the public sphere succeeds at philosophically providing the back story that links democracy to the media. From the start, it carried the assumption that a shared communicative space was a necessary precondition to explain the link between media and democratic governance. The geomedia refresh—and make accountable—the relevance of space for government. However, the nuances and limitations of geomedia and geodata still require a critical discussion and a prudent approach. This paper deconstructs geomedia as an epistemic assemblage of practices, norms, data, and tools, rather than considering it a single technology. The operation enhances the historical framework by tracing longer temporal lines that show how efforts to politically value places were key for governance even before the commodification of GPS data and locative technologies. A reconciliation with previous social research will help understand the full breadth of the value of the geomedia for democracy today. This paper is organized into four parts: after an initial conceptual review, the paper explores the prehistory of placemaking by linking the understandings of space with the creation of symbolic places for governance. The following section on the modernity of media location deals with the dual role of mapping and universal location as tools for identity building and governance strategies. The paper concludes with a discussion of the geomedia(-ted) public sphere(s) by considering technological policies (from GPS-enabled mobiles to geodata and the internet of things) and the geopolitical implications of such geomedia assemblages on the legitimate governance of communicative spaces.

Rapid technological advances in automation, algorithms, robots, and artificial intelligence (AI) entail risks, such as the loss of jobs, biases, and security threats, which raises questions about responsibility for the damage incurred by such risks and the development of solutions to ameliorate them. Because media play a central role in the representation and perception of technological risks and responsibility, this study explores the news coverage of automation. While previous research has focused on specific technologies, this study conducts a comprehensive analysis of the debate on automation, algorithms, robotics, and AI, including tonality, risks, and responsibility. The longitudinal media content analysis of three decades of Austrian news reports revealed that overall, the coverage increased, and it was optimistic in tone. However, algorithms were more frequently associated with risks and less positivity than other automation areas. Robotics received the most positive and the least risk-related coverage. Moreover, industry stakeholders were at the center of the responsibility network in the media discourse.

bstract: This article invites to revisit and update the notion of public sphere in three ways: first, recovering the idea of communicative space as an environment (medium) of social (inter)action; second, integrating the devices and the debates in one single complex field of political and socially relevant activity; and third, trying to understand and critically identify the challenges and changes in the mechanisms of legitimacy and in the actions of power. To do this, the article describes a model under development that allows to identify the factors that shape the urban communicative space from the analysis of four modes: representations of place (diversity of discourses); the structures of space (barriers and circulation); the textures of place (location and the communicative capital of the place); and connectivity (as the impact factor of the communicative space). The article suggests methodological strategies and examples of cases used for the development of each one of the complementing modes of analysis, which ultimately helps explaining the conditions for participating in the public debates., Este articulo propone revisitar y actualizar la noción de esfera pública de tres maneras: primero, recuperando la idea de espacio comunicativo como un entorno (médium) social de (inter)acción; segundo, integrando los aparatos y los debates en un solo plano complejo de actividad política y socialmente relevantes; y tercero, intentando entender e identificar críticamente los retos y los cambios en los mecanismos de legitimidad, y en las acciones del poder. Y para hacerlo, el artículo describe un modelo en desarrollo que permite identificar los factores que moldean el espacio comunicativo urbano a partir de un análisis de cuatro modos: las representaciones de lugar (la diversidad de discursos); las estructuras del espacio (las barreras y la circulación); las texturas de lugar (la localización y el capital comunicativo del lugar); y la conectividad (o el factor de impacto del espacio comunicativo). El artículo propone estrategias metodológicas y ejemplos de casos utilizados para el desarrollo de cada uno de los modos de análisis que se complementan, en última instancia, para explicar las condiciones de participación en el debate público.