Interpersonal Surveillance on Social Media

Abstract

This article examines changing rules and regimes of visibility on social media, using Facebook as a case study. Interpersonal social media surveillance warrants a care of the virtual self. Yet this care is complicated by social media’s rapid growth, and especially Facebook’s cross-contextual information flows that publicize otherwise private information. Drawing from a series of thirty interviews, this article focuses on how users perceive and manage their own visibility and take advantage of the visibility of other users. These experiences are tied to shifting understandings of private and public information, as well as new terms like “stalking” and “creeping” that frame surveillant practices.Cet article examine l’évolution des règles et des régimes de visibilité sur les médias sociaux, en utilisant Facebook comme une étude de cas. La surveillance interpersonnelle sur les médias sociaux nécessite un soin de l’être virtuel. Pourtant, ce soin est compliqué par l’expansion rapide des médias sociaux, et en particulier la nature inter contextuel de Facebook, qui diffuse de l’information privé. Tirant d’une série de trente entrevues, cet article concentre sur la manière dont les utilisateurs perçoivent et gèrent leur proper visibilité sur Facebook ainsi que de profiter de la visibilité des autres. Ces expériences sont liées à l’évolution des conceptions de l’information publique et privée, ainsi que de termes nouveaux comme «harcèlement» et «stalking» qui caractérise la surveillance sur les médias sociaux.

When is social media use social interaction? Defining mediated social interaction

“…Broadcasting and browsing are common and necessary components for social media to function (Trottier, 2012), but these are not only loose approximations of social interactions (Brabham, 2015), they are not considered social interaction whatsoever by users themselves. Studies that (Marwick, 2012), people watching, both virtual and in person, is an extension of social tendencies of keeping tabs on others (McAndrew and Jeong, 2012), which is a central part of everyday public life (Marwick, 2012).…”

Predictors of job seekers’ self-disclosure on social media

“…It is possible that some respondents use aliases on social media as a way to preserve their privacy (Raynes-Goldie, 2010), and are consequently less concerned about online image and inappropriate self-disclosure. Moreover, it is possible that some respondents augmented their privacy during their job search to prevent potential employers from viewing their personal content (Trottier, 2012). Employment status, however, was taken into account as a possible confounding variable and was not found to be a significant predictor in any of the conducted regression analyses.…”

“…In this social relationship, several social benefits and costs come to play from the user's perspective. On Facebook, for example, the pay off for using this social network is convenience, and staying in touch with friends, acquaintances and co-workers; whereas the cost for non-participation is social exclusion and a lack of online identity (Raynes-Goldie, 2010;Trottier, 2012). In terms of self-disclosure in particular, a social contract implies that individuals choose to disclose personal information when they perceive the existence of a certain benefit in exchange (Chang & Heo, 2014).…”

“…Omarzu, 2000;Misoch, 2015), which present this practice as a decision-making process dependent on a number of key factors. Among these factors, the present study takes into account three predictors in particular from the job seeker's perspective: (1) the motivation to keep a professional online image in the situational context of computer-mediated communication on social media, with the goals of developing one's online identity and gaining a recruiter's approval; (2) the personal trait On Facebook, for example, friends shape one's online reputation (Trottier, 2012), and may even act as part of one's extended self (Belk, 2013).…”

Do Birds of a Feather Watch Each Other?

“…They take the point of view of the person disclosing the location but do not adequately inform us about the person viewing the location disclosures, which Trottier [44] recently theorized, can also be construed as social surveillance by network ties.…”