Social media

From Bharatpedia, an open encyclopedia


Social media app icons on a smartphone

Social media are interactive technologies that facilitate the creation and sharing of information, ideas, interests, and other forms of expression through virtual communities and networks.[1][2] While challenges to the definition of social media arise[3][4] due to the variety of stand-alone and built-in social media services currently available, there are some common features:[2]

  1. Social media are interactive Web 2.0 Internet-based applications.[5]
  2. User-generated content—such as text posts or comments, digital photos or videos, and data generated through all online interactions — is the lifeblood of social media.[2][5]
  3. Users create service-specific profiles for the website or app that are designed and maintained by the social media organization.[2][6]
  4. Social media helps the development of online social networks by connecting a user's profile with those of other individuals or groups.[2][6]

Users usually access social media services through web-based apps on desktops or download services that offer social media functionality to their mobile devices (e.g., smartphones and tablets). As users engage with these electronic services, they create highly interactive platforms which individuals, communities, and organizations can share, co-create, discuss, participate, and modify user-generated or self-curated content posted online.[7][8][1] Additionally, social media are used to document memories; learn about and explore things; advertise oneself; and form friendships along with the growth of ideas from the creation of blogs, podcasts, videos, and gaming sites.[9] This changing relationship between humans and technology is the focus of the emerging field of technological self-studies.[10] Some of the most popular social media websites, with more than 100 million registered users, include Facebook (and its associated Facebook Messenger), TikTok, WeChat, Instagram, QZone, Weibo, Twitter, Tumblr, Baidu Tieba, and LinkedIn. Depending on interpretation, other popular platforms that are sometimes referred to as social media services include YouTube, QQ, Quora, Telegram, WhatsApp, Signal, LINE, Snapchat, Pinterest, Viber, Reddit, Discord, VK, Microsoft Teams, and more. Wikis are examples of collaborative content creation.

Many social media outlets differ from traditional media (e.g., print magazines and newspapers, TV, and radio broadcasting) in many ways, including quality,[11] reach, frequency, usability, relevancy, and permanence.[12] Additionally, social media outlets operate in a dialogic transmission system, i.e., many sources to many receivers, while traditional media outlets operate under a monologic transmission model (i.e., one source to many receivers). For instance, a newspaper is delivered to many subscribers and a radio station broadcasts the same programs to an entire city.[13]

Since the dramatic expansion of the Internet, digital media or digital rhetoric can be used to represent or identify a culture. Studying how the rhetoric that exists in the digital environment has become a crucial new process for many scholars.

Observers have noted a wide range of positive and negative impacts when it comes to the use of social media. Social media can help to improve an individual's sense of connectedness with real or online communities and can be an effective communication (or marketing) tool for corporations, entrepreneurs, non-profit organizations, advocacy groups, political parties, and governments. Observers have also seen that there has been a rise in social movements using social media as a tool for communicating and organizing in times of political unrest.

History of social media[edit]

Early computing[edit]

Front panel of the 1969-era ARPANET Interface Message Processor.
IMP log for the first message sent over the Internet, using ARPANET.

The PLATO system was launched in 1960, after being developed at the University of Illinois and subsequently commercially marketed by Control Data Corporation. It offered early forms of social media features with 1973-era innovations such as Notes, PLATO's message-forum application; TERM-talk, its instant-messaging feature; Talkomatic, perhaps the first online chat room; News Report, a crowdsourced online newspaper, and blog; and Access Lists, enabling the owner of a note file or other application to limit access to a certain set of users, for example, only friends, classmates, or co-workers.

ARPANET, which first came online in 1967, had by the late-1970s developed a rich cultural exchange of non-government/business ideas and communication, as evidenced by the network etiquette (or 'netiquette') described in a 1982 handbook on computing at MIT's Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.[14] ARPANET evolved into the Internet following the publication of the first Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) specification, RFC 675 (Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program), written by Vint Cerf, Yogen Dalal and Carl Sunshine in 1974.[15] This became the foundation of Usenet, conceived by Tom Truscott and Jim Ellis in 1979 at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Duke University, and established in 1980.

A precursor of the electronic bulletin board system (BBS), known as Community Memory, appeared by 1973. True electronic BBSs arrived with the Computer Bulletin Board System in Chicago, which first came online on February 16, 1978. Before long, most major cities had more than one BBS running on TRS-80, Apple II, Atari, IBM PC, Commodore 64, Sinclair, and similar personal computers. The IBM PC was introduced in 1981, and subsequent models of both Mac computers and PCs were used throughout the 1980s. Multiple modems, followed by specialized telecommunication hardware, allowed many users to be online simultaneously. Compuserve, Prodigy and AOL were three of the largest BBS companies and were the first to migrate to the Internet in the 1990s. Between the mid-1980s and the mid-1990s, BBSes numbered in the tens of thousands in North America alone.[16] Message forums (a specific structure of social media) arose with the BBS phenomenon throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. When the World Wide Web (WWW, or 'the web') was added to the Internet in the mid-1990s, message forums migrated to the web, becoming Internet forums, primarily due to cheaper per-person access as well as the ability to handle far more people simultaneously than telco modem banks.

Digital imaging and semiconductor image sensor technology facilitated the development and rise of social media.[17] Advances in metal-oxide-semiconductor (MOS) semiconductor device fabrication, reaching smaller micron and then sub-micron levels during the 1980s–1990s, led to the development of the NMOS (n-type MOS) active-pixel sensor (APS) at Olympus in 1985,[18][19] and then the complementary MOS (CMOS) active-pixel sensor (CMOS sensor) at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in 1993.[18][20] CMOS sensors enabled the mass proliferation of digital cameras and camera phones, which bolstered the rise of social media.[17]

Development of social-media platforms[edit]

SixDegrees, launched in 1997, is often regarded as the first social media site.

The development of social media began with simple platforms.[21] GeoCities was one of the earliest social networking services, launched in November 1994, followed by Classmates.com in December 1995 and SixDegrees.com in May 1997.[22] Unlike instant-messaging clients (e.g., ICQ and AOL's AIM) or chat clients (e.g., IRC, iChat, or Chat Television), SixDegrees was the first online business that was created for real people, using their real names.[21] As such, according to CBS News, SixDegrees is "widely considered to be the very first social networking site," as it included "profiles, friends lists and school affiliations" that could be used by registered users.[22] Research from 2015 shows that the world spent 22% of their online time on social networks,[23] thus suggesting the popularity of social media platforms. It is speculated that the increase in social media's popularity is due to the widespread daily use of smartphones.[24] As many as 4.08 billion social media users worldwide were found active on smartphones as of October 2020.

Definition and features[edit]

The idea that social media are defined simply by their ability to bring people together has been seen as too broad, as this would suggest that fundamentally different technologies like the telegraph and telephone are also social media.[25] The terminology is unclear, with some early researchers referring to social media as social networks or social networking services in the mid 2000s.[6] A more recent paper from 2015 reviewed the prominent literature in the area and identified four common features unique to then-current social media services:[2]

  1. Social media are Web 2.0 Internet-based applications.[2][5]
  2. User-generated content (UGC) is the lifeblood of the social media organism.[2][5]
  3. Users create service-specific profiles for the site or app that are designed and maintained by the social media organization.[2][6]
  4. Social media facilitate the development of online social networks by connecting a user's profile with those of other individuals or groups.[2][6]

In 2019, Merriam-Webster defined social media as "forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos)."[26]

While the variety of evolving stand-alone and built-in social media services makes it challenging to define them,[2] marketing and social media experts broadly agree that social media include the following 13 types of social media:[27]

Mobile social media[edit]

Mobile social media refers to the use of social media on mobile devices such as smartphones and tablet computers. Mobile social media are useful applications of mobile marketing because the creation, exchange, and circulation of user-generated content can assist companies with marketing research, communication, and relationship development.[28] Mobile social media differ from others because they incorporate the current location of the user (location-sensitivity) or the time delay between sending and receiving messages.

Social media promotes users to share content with others and display content in order to enhance a particular brand or product.[29] Social media allows people to be creative and share interesting ideas with their followers or fans. Certain social media applications such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram are places where users share specific political or sports content. Many reporters and journalists produce updates and information on sports and political news. It can truly give users pertinent and necessary information to stay up to date on relevant news stories and topics.

According to Andreas Kaplan, mobile social media applications can be differentiated among four types:[28]

  1. Space-timers (location and time-sensitive): Exchange of messages with relevance mostly for one specific location at one specific point in time (e.g. Facebook Places, WhatsApp, Foursquare)
  2. Space-locators (only location sensitive): Exchange of messages with relevance for one specific location, which is tagged to a certain place and read later by others (e.g. Yelp, Qype, Tumblr, Fishbrain)
  3. Quick-timers (only time sensitive): Transfer of traditional social media mobile apps to increase immediacy (e.g. posting on Twitter or status updates on Facebook)
  4. Slow-timers (neither location nor time sensitive): Transfer of traditional social media applications to mobile devices (e.g. watching a YouTube video or reading/editing a Wikipedia article)

Elements and function[edit]

Viral content[edit]

Some social media sites have the potential for content posted there to spread virally over social networks. The term is an analogy to the concept of viral infections, which can spread rapidly from individual to individual. In a social media context, content or websites that are 'viral' (or which 'go viral') are those with a greater likelihood that users will re-share content posted (by another user) to their social network, leading to further sharing. In some cases, posts containing popular content or fast-breaking news have been rapidly shared and re-shared by a huge number of users.

Businesses have a particular interest in viral marketing tactics because a viral campaign can achieve widespread advertising coverage (particularly if the viral reposting itself makes the news) for a fraction of the cost of a traditional marketing campaign, which typically uses printed materials, like newspapers, magazines, mailings, and billboards, and television and radio commercials. Nonprofit organizations and activists may have similar interests in posting content on social media sites with the aim of it going viral.

Many social media sites provide specific functionality to help users re-share (also known as re-blogging) content, such as Twitter's 'retweet' button, Pinterest's 'pin' function, Facebook's 'share' option, or Tumblr's 're-blog' function. Re-sharing (or, in this case, retweeting) is an especially popular component and feature of Twitter, allowing its users to keep up with important events and stay connected with their peers, as well as contributing in various ways throughout social media.[30] When certain posts become popular, they start to get retweeted over and over again, becoming viral. Hashtags can be used in tweets, and can also be used to take count of how many people have used that hashtag.

Bots[edit]

Bots are automated programs that operate on the Internet,[31] which have grown in demand, due to their ability to automate many communication tasks, leading to the creation of a new industry of bot providers.[32]

Chatbots and social bots are programmed to mimic natural human interactions such as liking, commenting, following, and unfollowing on social media platforms.[33] As companies aim for greater market shares and increased audiences, internet bots have also been developed to facilitate social media marketing.[34] With the existence of social bots and chatbots, however, the marketing industry has also met an analytical crisis, as these bots make it difficult to differentiate between human interactions and automated bot interactions.[35] For instance, marketing data has been negatively affected by some bots, causing "digital cannibalism" in social media marketing. Additionally, some bots violate the terms of use on many social media platforms such as Instagram, which can result in profiles being taken down and banned.[36]

'Cyborgs'—either bot-assisted humans or human-assisted bots[37]—are used for a number of different purposes both legitimate and illegitimate, from spreading fake news to creating marketing buzz.[38][39][40] A common legitimate use includes using automated programs to post on social media at a specific time.[41] In these cases, often the human writes the post content and the bot schedules the time of posting. In other cases, the cyborgs are more nefarious, e.g., contributing to the spread of fake news and misinformation.[37] Often these accounts blend human and bot activity in a strategic way, so that when an automated account is publicly identified, the human half of the cyborg is able to take over and could protest that the account has been used manually all along. In many cases, these accounts that are being used in a more illegitimate fashion try to pose as real people; in particular, the number of their friends or followers resemble that of a real person.[37] Cyborgs are also related to sock puppet accounts, where one human pretends to be someone else, but can also include one human operating multiple cyborg accounts.

New social media technology[edit]

There has been rapid growth in the number of U.S. patent applications that cover new technologies that are related to social media, and the number of them that are published has been growing rapidly over the past five years.[citation needed] As of 2020, there are over 5000 published patent applications in the United States.[42] As many as 7000 applications may be currently on file including those that have not been published yet; however, only slightly over 100 of these applications have issued as patents, largely due to the multi-year backlog in examination of business method patents, i.e., patents that outline and claim new methods of doing business.[43]

Platform convergence[edit]

As an instance of technological convergence, various social media platforms of different kinds adapted functionality beyond their original scope, increasingly overlapping with each other over time, albeit usually not implemented as completely as on dedicated platforms.

Examples are the social hub site Facebook launching an integrated video platform in May 2007,[44] and Instagram, whose original scope was low-resolution photo sharing, introducing the ability to share quarter-minute 640×640 pixel videos in 2013[45] (later extended to a minute with increased resolution), acting like a minimal video platform without video seek bar. Instagram later implemented stories (short videos self-destructing after 24 hours), a concept popularized by Snapchat, as well as IGTV, for seekable videos of up to ten minutes or one hour depending on account status.[46] Stories have been later adapted by the dedicated video platform YouTube in 2018, although access is restricted to the mobile apps, excluding mobile and desktop websites.[47]

Twitter, whose original scope was text-based microblogging, later adapted photo sharing functionality (deprecating third-party services such as TwitPic),[48] later video sharing with 140-second time limit and view counter but no manual quality selection or subtitles like on dedicated video platforms, and originally only available to mobile app users but later implemented in their website front ends.[49][50] Then a media studio feature for business users, which resembles YouTube's Creator Studio.[51]

The discussion platform Reddit added an integrated image hoster in June 2016 after Reddit users commonly relied on the external standalone image sharing platform Imgur,[52] and an internal video hoster around a year later.[53] In July 2020, the ability to share multiple images in a single post (image galleries), a feature known from Imgur, was implemented.[54] Imgur itself implemented sharing videos of up to 30 seconds in May 2018, later extended to one minute.[55][56]

Starting in 2018, the dedicated video platform YouTube rolled out a Community feature accessible through a channel tab (which usurps the previous Discussion channel tab), where text-only posts, as well as polls can be shared. To be enabled, channels have to pass a subscriber count threshold which has been lowered over time.[57]

Statistics on usage and membership[edit]

According to Statista, it is estimated that, in 2020, there are around 3.6 billion people using social media around the globe; up from 3.4 billion in 2019. This number is expected to increase to 4.41 billion in 2025.[58] In 2022, the number of social media users is expected to reach 4.01 billion, an estimated increase of 4.7% compared to the year 2021. The figures for the next two years also have encouraging results. In 2023, this number is expected to increase by around 4.5% from the 2022 figures and is expected to reach 4.19 billion. For the year 2024, it is estimated that the number of social media users could reach 4.33 billion, an increase of 3.3% compared to the figures for 2023.[59]

Most popular social networking services[edit]

The following is a list of the most popular social networking services based on the number of active users as of January per Statista.[60]

Social networking services with the most users, January 2021[61]
# Network Name Number of Users

(in millions)

Country of Origin
1 Facebook 2,740 United States United States
2 YouTube 2,291 United States United States
3 WhatsApp 2,000 United States United States
4 Facebook Messenger 1,300 United States United States
5 Instagram 1,221 United States United States
6 WeChat 1,213 China China
7 QQ 800 China China
8 TikTok 689 China China
9 Douyin 600 China China
10 Sina Weibo 511 China China

Usage: Before the COVID-19 pandemic[edit]

A study from 2009 suggests that there may be individual differences that help explain who uses social media and who does not: extraversion and openness have a positive relationship with social media, while emotional stability has a negative sloping relationship with social media.[62] A separate study from 2015 found that people with a higher social comparison orientation appear to use social media more heavily than people with low social comparison orientation.[63]

Data from Common Sense Media has suggested that children under the age of 13 in the United States use social networking services despite the fact that many social media sites have policies that state one must be at least 13-years-old or older to join.[64] In 2017, Common Sense Media conducted a nationally representative survey of parents of children from birth to age 8 and found that 4% of children at this age used social media sites such as Instagram, Snapchat, or (now-defunct) Musical.ly “often” or “sometimes.”[65] A different nationally representative survey by Common Sense in 2019 surveyed young Americans ages 8–16 and found that about 31% of children ages 8–12 ever use social media such as Snapchat, Instagram, or Facebook.[66] In that same survey, when American teens ages 16–18 were asked when they started using social media, 28% said they started to use it before they were 13-years-old. However, the median age of starting to use social media was 14-years-old.

Usage: During the COVID-19 pandemic[edit]

Amount of usage by minors[edit]

In June 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a nationally representative survey by Cartoon Network and the Cyberbullying Research Center surveyed Americans tweens (ages 9–12) found that the most popular overall application in the past year was YouTube (67%).[67] (In general, as age increased, the tweens were more likely to have used major social media apps and games.) Similarly, a nationally representative survey by Common Sense Media conducted in 2020 of Americans ages 13–18 found that YouTube was also the most popular social media service (used by 86% of 13- to 18-year-old Americans in the past year).[68] As children grow older, they utilize certain social media services on a frequent basis and often use the application YouTube to consume content. The use of social media certainly increases as people grow older and it has become a customary thing to have an Instagram and Twitter account.

Apps used by U.S. tweens (ages 9–12), 2019-2020[67]:39–42
Platform Overall Boys Girls 9-year-olds 12-year-olds
YouTube 67% 68% 66% 53.6% 74.6%
Minecraft 48% 61% 35% 43.6% 49.9%
Roblox 47% 44% 49% 41.2% 41.7%
Google Classroom 45% 48% 41% 39.6% 49.3%
Fortnite 31% 43% 20% 22.2% 38.9%
TikTok 30% 23% 30% 16.8% 37%
YouTube Kids 26% 24% 28% 32.7% 22.1%
Snapchat 16% 11% 21% 5.6% 22.3%
Facebook Messenger Kids 15% 12% 18% 19.1% 10.4%
Instagram 15% 12% 19% 3% 28.8%
Discord 8% 11% 5% 0.7% 14.4%
Facebook 8% 6% 9% 2.2% 15%
Twitch 5% 7% 2% 1.0% 9.9%
None of the above 5% 6% 5% 9.6% 3.3%
Social media platforms used by U.S. kids in 2020 (ages 13–18) and 2017 (ages 10–18)[68]
Platform 2020 2017
YouTube 86% 70%
Instagram 69% 60%
Snapchat 68% 59%
TikTok 47% N/A
Facebook 43% 63%
Twitter 28% 36%
Reddit 14% 6%
Another social networking service 2% 3%
Do not use social networking service 4% 6%

Reasons for use by adults[edit]

While adults were already using social media before the COVID-19 Pandemic, more started using it and for additional reasons, particularly to stay socially connected and to get updates on the pandemic.

"Social media have become popularly use to seek for medical information and have fascinated the general public to collect information regarding corona virus pandemics in various perspectives. During these days, people are forced to stay at home and the social media have connected and supported awareness and pandemic updates."[69]

This also made healthcare workers and systems more aware of social media as a place people were getting health information about the pandemic:

"During the COVID-19 pandemic, social media use has accelerated to the point of becoming a ubiquitous part of modern healthcare systems."[70]

Though this also led to the spread of disinformation, indeed, on December 11, 2020, the CDC put out a "Call to Action: Managing the Infodemic".[71] Some healthcare organizations even used hashtags as interventions and published articles on their Twitter data:[72]

"Promotion of the joint usage of #PedsICU and #COVID19 throughout the international pediatric critical care community in tweets relevant to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and pediatric critical care."[72]

However others in the medical community were concerned about social media addiction, due to it as an increasingly important context and therefore "source of social validation and reinforcement" and are unsure if increased social media use is a coping mechanism or harmful.[73]

Use at the organizational level[edit]

Governments[edit]

Governments may use social media to (for example):[74]

  • inform their opinions to public
  • interact with citizens
  • foster citizen participation
  • further open government
  • analyze/monitor public opinion and activities
  • educate the public about risks and public health.[75]

Law enforcement and investigations[edit]

Social media has been used extensively in civil and criminal investigations.[76] It has also been used to assist in searches for missing persons.[77] Police departments often make use of official social media accounts to engage with the public, publicize police activity, and burnish law enforcement's image;[78][79] conversely, video footage of citizen-documented police brutality and other misconduct has sometimes been posted to social media.[79]

In the United States U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement identifies and track individuals via social media, and also has apprehended some people via social media based sting operations.[80] U.S. Customs and Border Protection (also known as CPB) and the United States Department of Homeland Security use social media data as influencing factors during the visa process, and continue to monitor individuals after they have entered the country.[81] CPB officers have also been documented performing searches of electronics and social media behavior at the border, searching both citizens and non-citizens without first obtaining a warrant.[81]

Government reputation management[edit]

As social media gained momentum among the younger generations, governments began using it to improve their image, especially among the youth. In January 2021, Egyptian authorities were found to be using Instagram influencers as part of its media ambassadors program. The program was designed to revamp Egypt’s image and to counter the bad press Egypt had received because of the country's human rights record. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates participated in similar programs.[82] Similarly, Dubai has also extensively relied on social media and influencers to promote tourism. However, the restrictive laws of Dubai have always kept these influencers within the limits to not offend the authorities, or to criticize the city, politics or religion. The content of these foreign influencers is controlled to make sure that nothing portrays Dubai in a negative light.[83]

Businesses[edit]

The high distribution of social media in the private environment drives companies to deal with the application possibilities of social media on[84] a customer-organizational level; and an intra-organizational level.

Marketplace actors can use social media tools for marketing research, communication, sales promotions/discounts, informal employee-learning/organizational development, relationship development/loyalty programs,[28] and e-Commerce. Often social media can become a good source of information and/or explanation of industry trends for a business to embrace change. Trends in social-media technology and usage change rapidly, making it crucial for businesses to have a set of guidelines that can apply to many social media platforms.[85]

Companies are increasingly[quantify] using social-media monitoring tools to monitor, track, and analyze online conversations on the Web about their brand or products or about related topics of interest. This can prove useful in public relations management and advertising-campaign tracking, allowing analysts to measure return on investment for their social media ad spending, competitor-auditing, and for public engagement. Tools range from free, basic applications to subscription-based, more in-depth tools.

Financial industries utilize the power of social media as a tool for analyzing the sentiment of financial markets. These range from the marketing of financial products, gaining insights into market sentiment, future market predictions, and as a tool to identify insider trading.[86]

Social media become effective through a process called[by whom?] "building social authority".[87] One of the foundation concepts in social media has become[when?] that one cannot completely control one's message through social media but rather one can simply begin to participate in the "conversation" expecting that one can achieve a significant influence in that conversation.[88]

Social media marketing[edit]

Social media marketing is the use of social media platforms and websites to promote a product or service and also to establish a connection with its customers. Social media marketing has increased due to the growing active user rates on social media sites. Though these numbers are not exponential. For example, as of 2018 Facebook had 2.2 billion users, Twitter had 330 million active users and Instagram had 800 million users.[89] Then in 2021 Facebook had 2.89 billion users[90] and Twitter had 206 million users.[91] Similar to traditional advertising, all of social media marketing can be divided into three types: (1) paid media, (2) earned media, and (3) owned media.[92] Paid social media is when a firm directly buys advertising on a social media platform. Earned social media is when the firms does something that impresses its consumers or other stakeholders and they spontaneously post their own content about it on social media. Owned social media is when the firm itself owns the social media channel and creates content for its followers.

One of the main uses is to interact with audiences to create awareness of the company or organization, with the main idea of creating a two-way communication system where the audience and/or customers can interact; e.g., customers can provide feedback on the firm's products.[93] However, since social media allows consumers to spread opinions and share experiences in a peer-to-peer fashion, this has shifted some of the power from the organization to consumers, since these messages can be transparent and honest.[94] Or at least appear so (more on this at influencers).

Social media can also be used to directly advertise; placing an advert on Facebook's Newsfeed, for example, can provide exposure of the brand to a large number of people. Social media platforms also enable targeting specific audiences with advertising. Users of social media are then able to like, share, and comment on the advert; this turns the passive advertising consumers into active advertising producers since they can pass the advert's message on to their friends.[95] Companies using social media marketing have to keep up with the different social media platforms and stay on top of ongoing trends. Since the different platforms and trends attract different audiences, firms must be strategic about their use of social media to attract the right audience.[5] Moreover, the tone of the content can affect the efficacy of social media marketing. Companies such as fast food franchise Wendy's have used humor (such as shitposting) to advertise their products by poking fun at competitors such as McDonald's and Burger King.[96] This particular example spawned a lot of fanart of the Wendy's mascot which circulated widely online, (particularly on sites like DeviantArt)[97] increasing the effect of the marketing campaign. Other companies such as Juul have used hashtags (such as #ejuice and #eliquid) to promote themselves and their products.[98]

Social media personalities, often referred to as "influencers", who are internet celebrities who have been employed and/or sponsored by marketers to promote products online. Research shows that digital endorsements seem to be successfully attracting social media users,[99] especially younger consumers who have grown up in the digital age.[100] In 2013, the United Kingdom Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) began to advise celebrities and sports stars to make it clear if they had been paid to tweet about a product or service by using the hashtag #spon or #ad within tweets containing endorsements, and the US Federal Trade Commission has issued similar guidelines.[101] The practice of harnessing social media personalities to market or promote a product or service to their following is commonly referred to as Influencer Marketing. In 2019 The Cambridge Dictionary defines an "influencer" as any person (personality, blogger, journalist, celebrity) who has the ability to affect the opinions, behaviors, or purchases of others through the use of social media.[102]

Marketing efforts can also take advantage of the peer effects in social media. Consumers tend to treat content on social media differently from traditional advertising (such as print ads), but these messages may be part of an interactive marketing strategy involving modeling, reinforcement, and social interaction mechanisms. A 2012 study focused on this communication described how communication between peers through social media can affect purchase intentions: a direct impact through conformity, and an indirect impact by stressing product engagement. This study indicated that social media communication between peers about a product had a positive relationship with product engagement.[103]

Politics[edit]

Social media have a range of uses in political processes and activities. Social media have been championed[by whom?] as allowing anyone with access to an Internet connection to become a content creator[104] and as empowering users.[105][better source needed] The role of social media in democratizing media participation, which proponents herald as ushering in a new era of participatory democracy, with all users able to contribute news and comments, may fall short of the ideals, given that many often follow like-minded individuals, as noted by Philip Pond and Jeff Lewis.[106] Online-media audience-members are largely passive consumers, while content creation is dominated by a small number of users who post comments and write new content.[107]:78 Online engagement does not always translate into real-world action, and Howard, Busch and Sheets have argued that there is a digital divide in North America because of the continent's history, culture, and geography.[108]

Younger generations are becoming[when?] more involved in politics due to the increase of political news posted on social media.[citation needed] Political campaigns are targeting millennials online via social-media posts in hope that they will increase their political engagement.[109] Social media was influential in the widespread attention given[by whom?] to the revolutionary outbreaks in the Middle East and North Africa during 2011.[110][111][112] During the Tunisian revolution in 2011, people used Facebook to organize meetings and protests.[113] However, debate persists about the extent to which social media facilitated this kind of political change.[114]

Social-media footprints of candidates for political office have grown during the last decade[timeframe?] - the 2016 United States presidential election provided good examples. Dounoucos et al. noted that Twitter use by candidates was unprecedented during that election cycle.[115] Most candidates in the United States have a Twitter account.[116] The public has also increased their reliance on social-media sites for political information.[115] In the European Union, social media have amplified political messages.[117]

Militant groups have begun[when?] to see social media as a major organizing and recruiting tool.[118] The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (also known as ISIL, ISIS, and Daesh) has used social media to promote its cause. In 2014, #AllEyesonISIS went viral on Arabic Twitter.[119] ISIS produces an online magazine named the Islamic State Report to recruit more fighters.[120] State-sponsored cyber-groups have weaponized social-media platforms to attack governments in the United States, the European Union, and the Middle East.[citation needed] Although phishing attacks via email are the most commonly used tactic to breach government networks, phishing attacks on social media rose 500% in 2016.[121]

Increasing political influence on social media[122] saw[when?] several campaigns running from one political side against another. Often,[quantify] foreign-originated social-media campaigns have sought to influence political opinion in another country. For example, a Twitter campaign run[when?] in Saudi Arabia produced thousands of tweets about Hillary Clinton's trending on #HillaryEmails by supporters of Mohammed bin Salman. It also involved Riyadh's social-marketing firm, SMAAT, which had a history of running such campaigns on Twitter.[123][124][125] Politicians themselves use social media to their advantage - and to spread their campaign messages and to influence voters.

Due to the growing abuse of human rights in Bahrain, activists have used social media to report acts of violence and injustice. They publicized the brutality of government authorities and police, who were detaining, torturing and threatening many individuals. On the other hand, Bahrain's government was using social media to track and target rights activists and individuals who were critical of the authorities; the government has stripped citizenship from over 1,000 activists as punishment.[126]

Hiring[edit]

Some employers examine job applicants' social media profiles as part of the hiring assessment. This issue raises many ethical questions that some consider an employer's right and others consider discrimination. Many Western-European countries have already implemented laws that restrict the regulation of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin have passed legislation that protects potential employees and current employees from employers that demand that they provide their usernames and/or passwords for any social media accounts.[127] Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites.[128]

For potential employees, using social media publicly may alter shape patterns of deception in resumes.[129][clarification needed]

Science[edit]

The use of social media in science communications offers extensive opportunities for exchanging scientific information, ideas, opinions and publications. Scientists use social media to share their scientific knowledge and new findings on platforms such as ResearchGate, LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and Academia.edu.[130] Among these the most common type of social media that scientists use is Twitter and blogs. It has been found that Twitter increased the scientific impact in the community. The use of social media has improved and elevated the interaction between scientists, reporters, and the general public.[citation needed] Over 495,000 opinions were shared on Twitter related to science in one year (between September 1, 2010, and August 31, 2011), which was an increase compared with past years.[131] Science related blogs motivate public interest in learning, following, and discussing science. Blogs use textual depth and graphical videos that provide the reader with a dynamic way to interact with scientific information. Both Twitter and blogs can be written quickly and allow the reader to interact in real time with the authors. However, the popularity of social media platforms changes quickly and scientists need to keep pace with changes in social media.[132] In terms of organized uses of scientific social media, one study in the context of climate change has shown that climate scientist and scientific institutions played a minimal role in online debate, while nongovernmental organizations played a larger role.[133]

Academia[edit]

Signals from social media are used to assess academic publications,[134] as well as for different scientific approaches.[clarification needed] Another study found that most of the health science students acquiring academic materials from others through social media.[135]

School admissions[edit]

It is not only an issue in the workplace but an issue in post-secondary school admissions as well. There have been situations where students have been forced to give up their social media passwords to school administrators.[136] There are inadequate laws to protect a student's social media privacy, and organizations such as the ACLU are pushing for more privacy protection, as it is an invasion. They urge students who are pressured to give up their account information to tell the administrators to contact a parent or lawyer before they take the matter any further. Although they are students, they still have the right to keep their password-protected information private.[137]

According to a 2007 journal, before social media[138] admissions officials in the United States used SAT and other standardized test scores, extra-curricular activities, letters of recommendation, and high school report cards to determine whether to accept or deny an applicant. In the 2010s, while colleges and universities still used these traditional methods to evaluate applicants, these institutions were increasingly accessing applicants' social media profiles to learn about their character and activities. According to Kaplan, Inc, a corporation that provides higher education preparation, in 2012 27% of admissions officers used Google to learn more about an applicant, with 26% checking Facebook.[139] Students whose social media pages include offensive jokes or photos, racist or homophobic comments, photos depicting the applicant engaging in illegal drug use or drunkenness, and so on, may be screened out from admission processes.

"One survey in July 2017, by the American Association of College Registrars and Admissions Officers, found that 11 percent of respondents said they had refused to admit an applicant based on social media content. This includes 8 percent of public institutions, where the First Amendment applies. The survey found that 30 percent of institutions acknowledged reviewing the personal social media accounts of applicants at least some of the time."[140]

Court cases[edit]

Social media comments and images are being used in a range of court cases including employment law, child custody/child support and insurance disability claims. After an Apple employee criticized his employer on Facebook, he was fired. When the former employee sued Apple for unfair dismissal, the court, after seeing the man's Facebook posts, found in favor of Apple, as the man's social media comments breached Apple's policies.[141] After a heterosexual couple broke up, the man posted "violent rap lyrics from a song that talked about fantasies of killing the rapper's ex-wife" and made threats against him. The court found him guilty and he was sentenced to jail.[141] In a disability claims case, a woman who fell at work claimed that she was permanently injured; the employer used the social media posts of her travels and activities to counter her claims.[141]

Courts do not always admit social media evidence, in part, because screenshots can be faked or tampered with.[142] Judges are taking emojis into account to assess statements made on social media; in one Michigan case where a person alleged that another person had defamed them in an online comment, the judge disagreed, noting that there was an emoji after the comment which indicated that it was a joke.[142] In a 2014 case in Ontario against a police officer regarding alleged assault of a protester during the G20 summit, the court rejected the Crown's application to use a digital photo of the protest that was anonymously posted online, because there was no metadata proving when the photo was taken and it could have been digitally altered.[142]

Social impacts[edit]

Disparity[edit]

The digital divide is a measure of disparity in the level of access to technology between households, socioeconomic levels or other demographic categories.[143][144] People who are homeless, living in poverty, elderly people and those living in rural or remote communities may have little or no access to computers and the Internet; in contrast, middle class and upper-class people in urban areas have very high rates of computer and Internet access. Other models argue that within a modern information society, some individuals produce Internet content while others only consume it,[145][146] which could be a result of disparities in the education system where only some teachers integrate technology into the classroom and teach critical thinking.[147] While social media has differences among age groups, a 2010 study in the United States found no racial divide.[148] Some zero-rating programs offer subsidized data access to certain websites on low-cost plans. Critics say that this is an anti-competitive program that undermines net neutrality and creates a "walled garden"[149] for platforms like Facebook Zero. A 2015 study found that 65% of Nigerians, 61% of Indonesians, and 58% of Indians agree with the statement that "Facebook is the Internet" compared with only 5% in the US.[150]

Eric Ehrmann contends that social media in the form of public diplomacy create a patina of inclusiveness that covers[151] traditional economic interests that are structured to ensure that wealth is pumped up to the top of the economic pyramid, perpetuating the digital divide and post-Marxian class conflict. He also voices concern over the trend that finds social utilities operating in a quasi-libertarian global environment of oligopoly that requires users in economically challenged nations to spend high percentages of annual income to pay for devices and services to participate in the social media lifestyle. Neil Postman also contends that social media will increase an information disparity between "winners" – who are able to use the social media actively – and "losers" – who are not familiar with modern technologies or who do not have access to them. People with high social media skills may have better access to information about job opportunities, potential new friends, and social activities in their area, which may enable them to improve their standard of living and their quality of life.

Political polarization[edit]

According to the Pew Research Center, a majority of Americans at least occasionally receive news from social media.[152] Because of algorithms on social media which filter and display news content which are likely to match their users' political preferences (known as a filter bubble), a potential impact of receiving news from social media includes an increase in political polarization due to selective exposure.[153] Political polarization refers to when an individual's stance on a topic is more likely to be strictly defined by their identification with a specific political party or ideology than on other factors. Selective exposure occurs when an individual favors information that supports their beliefs and avoids information that conflicts with their beliefs. A study by Hayat and Samuel-Azran conducted during the 2016 U.S. presidential election observed an "echo chamber" effect of selective exposure among 27,811 Twitter users following the content of cable news shows.[153] The Twitter users observed in the study were found to have little interaction with users and content whose beliefs were different from their own, possibly heightening polarization effects.[153][154] Another 2016 study using U.S. elections, conducted by Evans and Clark, revealed gender differences in the political use of Twitter between candidates.[155] Whilst politics is a male dominated arena, on social media the situation appears to be the opposite, with women discussing policy issues at a higher rate than their male counterparts. The study concluded that an increase in female candidates directly correlates to an increase in the amount of attention paid to policy issues, potentially heightening political polarization.[156]

Efforts to combat selective exposure in social media may also cause an increase in political polarization.[157] A study examining Twitter activity conducted by Bail et al. paid Democrat and Republican participants to follow Twitter handles whose content was different from their political beliefs (Republicans received liberal content and Democrats received conservative content) over a six-week period.[157] At the end of the study, both Democrat and Republican participants were found to have increased political polarization in favor of their own parties, though only Republican participants had an increase that was statistically significant.[157]

Though research has shown evidence that social media plays a role in increasing political polarization, it has also shown evidence that social media use leads to a persuasion of political beliefs.[158][159] An online survey consisting of 1,024 U.S. participants was conducted by Diehl, Weeks, and Gil de Zuñiga, which found that individuals who use social media were more likely to have their political beliefs persuaded than those who did not.[158] In particular, those using social media as a means to receive their news were the most likely to have their political beliefs changed.[158] Diehl et al. found that the persuasion reported by participants was influenced by the exposure to diverse viewpoints they experienced, both in the content they saw as well as the political discussions they participated in.[158] Similarly, a study by Hardy and colleagues conducted with 189 students from a Midwestern state university examined the persuasive effect of watching a political comedy video on Facebook.[159] Hardy et al. found that after watching a Facebook video of the comedian/political commentator John Oliver performing a segment on his show, participants were likely to be persuaded to change their viewpoint on the topic they watched (either payday lending or the Ferguson protests) to one that was closer to the opinion expressed by Oliver.[159] Furthermore, the persuasion experienced by the participants was found to be reduced if they viewed comments by Facebook users which contradicted the arguments made by Oliver.[159]

Research has also shown that social media use may not have an effect on polarization at all.[160] A U.S. national survey of 1,032 participants conducted by Lee et al. found that participants who used social media were more likely to be exposed to a diverse number of people and amount of opinion than those who did not, although using social media was not correlated with a change in political polarization for these participants.[160]

In a study examining the potential polarizing effects of social media on the political views of its users, Mihailidis and Viotty suggest that a new way of engaging with social media must occur to avoid polarization.[161] The authors note that media literacies (described as methods which give people skills to critique and create media) are important to using social media in a responsible and productive way, and state that these literacies must be changed further in order to have the most effectiveness.[161] In order to decrease polarization and encourage cooperation among social media users, Mihailidis and Viotty suggest that media literacies must focus on teaching individuals how to connect with other people in a caring way, embrace differences, and understand the ways in which social media has a real impact on the political, social, and cultural issues of the society they are a part of.[161]

Stereotyping[edit]

Recent research has demonstrated that social media, and media in general, have the power to increase the scope of stereotypes not only in children but people of all ages.[162]

In Spain[edit]

Three researchers at Blanquerna University, Spain, examined how adolescents interact with social media and specifically Facebook. They suggest that interactions on the website encourage representing oneself in the traditional gender constructs, which helps maintain gender stereotypes.[163] The authors noted that girls generally show more emotion in their posts and more frequently change their profile pictures, which according to some psychologists can lead to self-objectification.[164] On the other hand, the researchers found that boys prefer to portray themselves as strong, independent, and powerful.[165] For example, men often post pictures of objects and not themselves, and rarely change their profile pictures; using the pages more for entertainment and pragmatic reasons. In contrast, girls generally post more images that include themselves, friends and things they have emotional ties to, which the researchers attributed that to the higher emotional intelligence of girls at a younger age. The authors sampled over 632 girls and boys from the ages of 12–16 from Spain in an effort to confirm their beliefs. The researchers concluded that masculinity is more commonly associated with positive psychological well-being, while femininity displays less psychological well-being.[166] Furthermore, the researchers discovered that people tend not to completely conform to either stereotype, and encompass desirable parts of both. Users of Facebook generally use their profiles to reflect that they are a "normal" person. In that study, social media was found to uphold gender stereotypes both feminine and masculine. The researchers also noted that traditional stereotypes are often upheld by boys more so than girls. The authors described how neither stereotype was entirely positive, but most people viewed masculine values as more positive.

Effects on youth communication[edit]

Social media has allowed for mass cultural exchange and intercultural communication. As different cultures have different value systems, cultural themes, grammar, and world views, they also communicate differently.[167] The emergence of social media platforms fused together different cultures and their communication methods, blending together various cultural thinking patterns and expression styles.[168][better source needed]

Social media has affected the way youth communicate, by introducing new forms of language. Abbreviations have been introduced to cut down on the time it takes to respond online. The commonly known "LOL" has become globally recognized as the abbreviation for "laugh out loud" thanks to social media and use by people of all ages particularly as people grow up.

Another trend that influences the way youth communicates is (through) the use of hashtags. With the introduction of social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, the hashtag was created to easily organize and search for information. Hashtags can be used when people want to advocate for a movement, store content or tweets from a movement for future use, and allow other social media users to contribute to a discussion about a certain movement by using existing hashtags. Using hashtags as a way to advocate for something online makes it easier and more accessible for more people to acknowledge it around the world.[169] As hashtags such as #tbt ("throwback Thursday") become a part of online communication, it influenced the way in which youth share and communicate in their daily lives. Because of these changes in linguistics and communication etiquette, researchers of media semiotics[who?] have found that this has altered youth's communications habits and more.[vague][citation needed]

Social media has offered a new platform for peer pressure with both positive and negative communication. From Facebook comments to likes on Instagram, how the youth communicate, and what is socially acceptable is now heavily based on social media.[170] Social media does make kids and young adults more susceptible to peer pressure. The American Academy of Pediatrics has also shown that bullying, the making of non-inclusive friend groups, and sexual experimentation have increased situations related to cyberbullying, issues with privacy, and the act of sending sexual images or messages to someone's mobile device. This includes issues of sexting and revenge porn among minors, and the resulting legal implications and issues, and resulting risk of trauma.[171][172][173][174] On the other hand, social media also benefits the youth and how they communicate.[175] Adolescents can learn basic social and technical skills that are essential in society.[175] Through the use of social media, kids and young adults are able to strengthen relationships by keeping in touch with friends and family, make more friends, and participate in community engagement activities and services.[176]

Deceased users[edit]

Social media content, like most content on the web, will continue to persist unless the user deletes it. This brings up the inevitable question of what to do once a social media user dies, and no longer has access to their content.[177] As it is a topic that is often left undiscussed, it is important to note that each social media platform, e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Pinterest, has created its own guidelines for users who have died.[178] In most cases on social media, the platforms require a next-of-kin to prove that the user is deceased, and then give them the option of closing the account or maintaining it in a 'legacy' status. Ultimately, social media users should make decisions about what happens to their social media accounts before they pass, and make sure their instructions are passed on to their next-of-kin.

Guidelines for users who have died, by platform[178]
Platform Guideline
Twitter[179] If a user has died, the company will work with an immediate family member to deactivate the account. Additionally, Twitter will not give the account to any person(s), regardless of the relationship.
Facebook The company added a new setting last year[when?] that gives users the option of having their account permanently deleted when one dies. There is also an option for 'legacy contact' which means that the Facebook user can have a family and/or friend take over the account once the person has died. The 'legacy contact' option is under the security tab at the bottom of the page.
Instagram[180] There are two options for people who have died. Similar to Facebook, the user can have the account memorialized with proof of death. The other option is to have the account deleted.
LinkedIn[181] A family member can request that the account be shut down. The family member must provide the URL to the account, proof of relationship, the account user's email address, date of death, a link to the obituary, and the name of the last company the deceased worked for.
Pinterest To delete the account of someone who has died, one must email the company with the URL of the account. One must also provide a death certificate and/or provide a link to the obituary as well as proof of relationship to the deceased.
YouTube[182] YouTube provides three capabilities for a deceased user's account: (1) they can close close the account, (2) they can transfer payments from the account to an immediate family member and legal representative of the user's estate, and (3) they can provide the data in the account to a family member. All three capabilities require (1) the requestor's government-issued ID or driver's license, (2) the decedent's death certificate, and (3) additional supporting documentation.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. 1.0 1.1 Kietzmann, Jan H.; Kristopher Hermkens (2011). "Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media". Business Horizons (Submitted manuscript). 54 (3): 241–251. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005.
  2. 2.00 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 Obar, Jonathan A.; Wildman, Steve (2015). "Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue". Telecommunications Policy. 39 (9): 745–750. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2015.07.014. SSRN 2647377.
  3. Tuten, Tracy L.; Solomon, Michael R. (2018). Social media.marketing. Los Angeles: Sage. p. 4. ISBN 978-1-5264-2387-0.
  4. Aichner, T.; Grünfelder, M.; Maurer, O.; Jegeni, D. (2021). "Twenty-Five Years of Social Media: A Review of Social Media Applications and Definitions from 1994 to 2019". Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 24 (4): 215–222. doi:10.1089/cyber.2020.0134. PMC 8064945. PMID 33847527.
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Kaplan Andreas M.; Haenlein Michael (2010). "Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media" (PDF). Business Horizons. 53 (1): 61. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-11-24. Retrieved 2016-12-07.
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 boyd, danah m.; Ellison, Nicole B. (2007). "Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship". Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 13 (1): 210–30. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x.
  7. Schivinski, Bruno; Brzozowska-Woś, Magdalena; Stansbury, Ellena; Satel, Jason; Montag, Christian; Pontes, Halley M. (2020). "Exploring the Role of Social Media Use Motives, Psychological Well-Being, Self-Esteem, and Affect in Problematic Social Media Use". Frontiers in Psychology. 11: 3576. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617140. ISSN 1664-1078. PMC 7772182. PMID 33391137.
  8. Boyd, D. N., and Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. J. Comput. Commun. 13, 210–230. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
  9. O'Keeffe, Gwenn Schurgin; Clarke-Pearson, Kathleen; Media, Council on Communications and (April 1, 2011). "The Impact of Social Media on Children, Adolescents, and Families". Pediatrics. 127 (4): 800–804. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0054. ISSN 0031-4005. PMID 21444588.
  10. Dennis, Amy (July 5, 2017). "5 Social Media Outlets Ruling the World". Nice Branding Agency. Retrieved October 10, 2021.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  11. Agichtein, Eugene; Carlos Castillo. Debora Donato; Aristides Gionis; Gilad Mishne (2008). "Finding high-quality content in social media" (PDF). WISDOM – Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining: 183–193.
  12. Xiaohui Tao; Wei Huang; Xiangming Mu; Haoran Xie (18 November 2016). "Special issue on knowledge management of web social media". Web Intelligence. 14 (4): 273–274. doi:10.3233/WEB-160343 – via Lingnan scholars.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. Pavlik & MacIntoch, John and Shawn (2015). Converging Media 4th Edition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. p. 189. ISBN 978-0-19-934230-3.
  14. Stacy, Christopher C. (September 7, 1982). "Getting Started Computing at the AI Lab" (PDF). MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-03-23.
  15. Cerf, Vinton; Dalal, Yogen; Sunshine, Carl (December 1974), RFC 675, Specification of Internet Transmission Control Protocol
  16. Benj Edwards (November 4, 2016). "The Lost Civilization of Dial-Up Bulletin Board Systems". The Atlantic. online. Retrieved 2018-02-05.
  17. 17.0 17.1 "CMOS Sensors Enable Phone Cameras, HD Video". NASA Spinoff. NASA. Retrieved 6 November 2019.
  18. 18.0 18.1 Fossum, Eric R. (12 July 1993). Blouke, Morley M. (ed.). "Active pixel sensors: are CCDs dinosaurs?". SPIE Proceedings Vol. 1900: Charge-Coupled Devices and Solid State Optical Sensors III. International Society for Optics and Photonics. 1900: 2–14. Bibcode:1993SPIE.1900....2F. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.408.6558. doi:10.1117/12.148585. S2CID 10556755.
  19. Matsumoto, Kazuya; et al. (1985). "A new MOS phototransistor operating in a non-destructive readout mode". Japanese Journal of Applied Physics. 24 (5A): L323. Bibcode:1985JaJAP..24L.323M. doi:10.1143/JJAP.24.L323.
  20. Fossum, Eric R.; Hondongwa, D. B. (2014). "A Review of the Pinned Photodiode for CCD and CMOS Image Sensors". IEEE Journal of the Electron Devices Society. 2 (3): 33–43. doi:10.1109/JEDS.2014.2306412.
  21. 21.0 21.1 Kirkpatrick, David (2011). The Facebook effect: the real inside story of Mark Zuckerberg and the world's fastest-growing company. London: Virgin.
  22. 22.0 22.1 "Then and now: a history of social networking sites". CBS news. Retrieved 2018-01-26.
  23. Nielsen Company. "Social Networks Blogs Now Account for One in Every Four and a Half Minutes Online". Nielsen. Retrieved 2015-04-30.
  24. Metzger, Justin (April 4, 2016). "Cell phones".
  25. Schejter, A.M.; Tirosh, N. (2015). ""Seek the meek, seek the just": Social media and social justice". Telecommunications Policy. 39 (9): 796–803. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2015.08.002.
  26. "Definition of SOCIAL MEDIA".
  27. Aichner, T.; Jacob, F. (March 2015). "Measuring the Degree of Corporate Social Media Use". International Journal of Market Research. 57 (2): 257–275. doi:10.2501/IJMR-2015-018. S2CID 166531788.
  28. 28.0 28.1 28.2 Kaplan, Andreas M. (March–April 2012). "If you love something, let it go mobile: Mobile marketing and mobile social media 4x4". Business Horizons. 55 (2): 129–139. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2011.10.009.
  29. Nikolinakou, Angeliki (January 2020). ""Do human values matter for promoting brands on social media? How social media users' values influence valuable brand‐related activities such as sharing, content creation, and reviews"". Journal of Consumer Behavior. 19 (1): 13–23. doi:10.1002/cb.1790. S2CID 210535859. Retrieved November 14, 2021.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  30. Ghosh, Rumi (June 2011). "Entropy-based Classification of 'Retweeting' Activity on Twitter". arXiv:1106.0346 [cs.SI].
  31. "the definition of bots". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 2017-05-11.
  32. "Global chatbot market 2015-2024 | Statistic". Statista. Retrieved 2017-05-11.
  33. Rodrigo, S. and Abraham, J. (2012). Development and Implementation of a Chat Bot in a Social Network. 2012 Ninth International Conference on Information Technology - New Generations.
  34. Castronovo, Cristina (2012). "Social Media in Alternative Marketing Communication Model". Journal of Marketing Development & Competitivness. 6: 117–136.
  35. Baym, Nancy K. (October 7, 2013). "Data Not Seen: The uses and shortcomings of social media metrics". First Monday. 18 (10). doi:10.5210/fm.v18i10.4873.
  36. "Terms of Use | Instagram Help Center". help.instagram.com. Retrieved 2017-06-26.
  37. 37.0 37.1 37.2 Chu, Z.; Gianvecchio, S.; Wang, H.; Jajodia, S. (2012). "Detecting automation of Twitter accounts: Are you a human, bot, or cyborg?". IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing. 9 (6): 811–824. doi:10.1109/tdsc.2012.75. S2CID 351844.
  38. Stone-Gross, B.; Holz, T.; Stringhini, G.; Vigna, G. (2011). "The Underground Economy of Spam: A Botmaster's Perspective of Coordinating Large-Scale Spam Campaigns" (PDF). LEET. 11: 4.
  39. House, A. (2014). The Real Cyborgs. Retrieved from: http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/projects/the-future-is-android/
  40. Schreckinger, B.,. "Inside Trump's 'cyborg' Twitter army", Politico, September 30, 2016 (retrieved May 10, 2017)
  41. Media 0, Annie Pilon In Social (2021-03-11). "50 Social Media Management Tools for your Business". Small Business Trends. Retrieved 2021-03-26.
  42. "USPTO search on published patent applications mentioning "social media"". Appft.uspto.gov. Retrieved 2012-04-24.
  43. "USPTO search on issued patents mentioning "social media"". Patft.uspto.gov. Retrieved 2012-04-24.
  44. Cashmore, Pete (May 25, 2007). "Facebook Video Launches: YouTube Beware!". Mashable. Retrieved June 15, 2017.
  45. "Introducing Video on Instagram | Instagram Blog". about.instagram.com.
  46. "Vido marketing". animoto.com. 2019-02-12.
  47. Alexander, Julia (29 November 2018). "YouTube is rolling out its Instagram-like Stories feature to more creators". The Verge.
  48. Parr, Ben (Aug 10, 2011). "Twitter Rolls Out Photo Sharing to All Users". Mashable.
  49. "Now on Twitter: group Direct Messages and mobile video camera". blog.twitter.com.
  50. "New ways to tap into video on Twitter". blog.twitter.com. 2016.
  51. "Twitter Updates Media Studio, Expands Access to All Users". Social Media Today.
  52. "r/announcements - Image Hosting on Reddit". reddit. 2016-06-21.
  53. "r/changelog - [Reddit change] Introducing video uploading beta". reddit. 2017-06-26.
  54. "Introducing Reddit Image Galleries". Upvoted. 2020-07-15.
  55. Liao, Shannon (29 May 2018). "Imgur adds 30-second video uploads so your GIFs can have soundtracks". The Verge.
  56. "How to Upload Video". Imgur.
  57. TeamYouTube [@TeamYouTube] (December 11, 2018). "New on the Community tab: Post Playlists to engage with your audience! If you have Community posts enabled on your channel, learn more about Playlist posts here → t.co/mE5tl7nR6E t.co/BR0ijr0xEq" (Tweet). Archived from the original on January 5, 2021. Retrieved November 2, 2021 – via Twitter.
  58. "Number of global social network users 2017-2025| Statista". Statista. Retrieved 2020-08-05.
  59. "All About Social Media Users and their Growth Until 2024". Arihant Webtech. 2022-01-02.
  60. "Most popular social networks worldwide as of April 2020, ranked by number of active users (in millions)". Statista.
  61. "Most used social media 2020". Statista. Retrieved 2020-11-28.
  62. Correa, Teresa; Hinsley, Amber W. (October 2009). "Who Interacts on the Web?: The Intersection of Users' Personality and Social Media Use". Computers in Human Behavior. 26 (2): 247–253. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.09.003.
  63. Vogel, Erin A.; Rose, Jason P.; Okdie, Bradley M.; Eckles, Katheryn; Franz, Brittany (2015). "Who compares and despairs? The effect of social comparison orientation on social media use and its outcomes". Personality and Individual Differences. 86: 249–56. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.026.
  64. Jargon, Julie (June 19, 2019). "How 13 Became the Internet's Age of Adulthood". The Wall Street Journal.
  65. Rideout, Vicky (2017). "The Common Sense census: Media use by kids age zero to eight, 2017". Common Sense Media.
  66. Rideout, Vicky; Robb, Michael B. (2019). "The Common Sense census: Media use by tweens and teens, 2019". Common Sense Media.
  67. 67.0 67.1 Patchin, Justin W.; Hinduja, Sameer (2020). "Tween cyberbullying in 2020". Cartoon Network. Archived from the original on 2020-10-20.
  68. 68.0 68.1 Robb, Michael B. (2020). "Teens and the news: The influencers, celebrities, and platforms they say matter most, 2020". Common Sense Media.
  69. Saud, Muhammad; Mashud, Musta'in; Ida, Rachmah (2020). "Usage of social media during the pandemic: Seeking support and awareness about COVID-19 through social media platforms". Journal of Public Affairs. 20 (4): e2417. doi:10.1002/pa.2417. ISSN 1479-1854. S2CID 224943667.
  70. Wong, Adrian; Ho, Serene; Olusanya, Olusegun; Antonini, Marta Velia; Lyness, David (2021-08-01). "The use of social media and online communications in times of pandemic COVID-19". Journal of the Intensive Care Society. 22 (3): 255–260. doi:10.1177/1751143720966280. ISSN 1751-1437. PMC 8373288. PMID 34422109.
  71. "Call for Action: Managing the Infodemic". www.who.int. Retrieved 2021-12-31.
  72. 72.0 72.1 Kudchadkar, Sapna R.; Carroll, Christopher L. (August 2020). "Using Social Media for Rapid Information Dissemination in a Pandemic: #PedsICU and Coronavirus Disease 2019". Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. 21 (8): e538–e546. doi:10.1097/PCC.0000000000002474. ISSN 1529-7535. PMC 7255404. PMID 32459792.
  73. Singh, Shweta; Dixit, Ayushi; Joshi, Gunjan (December 2020). "Is compulsive social media use amid COVID-19 pandemic addictive behavior or coping mechanism?". Asian Journal of Psychiatry. 54: 102290. doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102290. ISSN 1876-2018. PMC 7338858. PMID 32659658.
  74. Khan, Gohar F. (2017). Social Media for Government: A Practical Guide to Understanding, Implementing, and Managing Social Media Tools in the Public Sphere. SpringerBriefs in Political Science. Singapore: Springer. ISBN 978-981-10-2942-4. Retrieved 2019-04-28.
  75. Gesser-Edelsburg, Anat; Shir-Raz, Yaffa (2017). Risk Communication and Infectious Diseases in an Age of Digital Media. Routledge Studies in Public Health. ISBN 978-0-367-22405-9. Retrieved 2020-11-22.
  76. Joshua Brunty & Katherine Helenek (2014). Social Media Investigation for Law Enforcement. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-317-52165-5.
  77. Caroline Sturdy Colls; Stephen J. Morewitz, eds. (2016). Handbook of Missing Persons. Springer International. pp. 97, 102, 164.
  78. Perez, Kaitlyn (June 30, 2017). "Social Media Has Become a Critical Part of Law Enforcement". National Police Foundation.
  79. 79.0 79.1 Christopher J. Schneider (2015). "Police "Image Work" in an Era of Social Media" YouTube and 2007 Montebello Summit Protests". Social Media, Politics and the StateProtests, Revolutions, Riots, Crime and Policing in the Age of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Routledge Research in Information Technology and Society. Routledge. pp. 229–30. ISBN 9781317655480.
  80. Funk, McKenzie (2019-10-02). "How ICE Picks Its Targets in the Surveillance Age". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2019-10-22.
  81. 81.0 81.1 "Social Media Monitoring". Brennan Center for Justice. pp. 255–57.
  82. "Sugar-coated propaganda? Middle East taps into power of influencers". The Guardian. Retrieved 29 January 2020.
  83. "'In this world, social media is everything': how Dubai became the planet's influencer capital". The Guardian. 17 April 2021. Retrieved 17 April 2021.
  84. Meske, Christian; Stieglitz, Stefan (2014-01-15). "Reflektion der wissenschaftlichen Nutzenbetrachtung von Social Software / Reflecting the Scientific Discussion of Benefits Induced by Social Software". I-com. 13 (3). doi:10.1515/icom.2014.0015. ISSN 2196-6826. S2CID 168104889.
  85. Kaplan, Andreas M.; Haenlein, Michael (2010). "Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media" (PDF). Business Horizons. Bloomington, Indiana: Kelley School of Business. 53 (1): 64–65. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003. Retrieved 2019-04-28. Social Media is a very active and fast-moving domain. What may be up-to-date today could have disappeared from the virtual landscape tomorrow. It is therefore crucial for firms to have a set of guidelines that can be applied to any form of Social Media [...].
  86. Lugmayr, Artur (2013). "Predicting the Future of Investor Sentiment with Social Media in Stock Exchange Investments: A Basic Framework for the DAX Performance Index". Handbook of Social Media Management. Springer Berlin Heidelberg: 565–589. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28897-5_33. ISBN 978-3-642-28896-8.
  87. "5 Indirect Ways Building Social Authority Improves Your Brand". Business 2 Community. Retrieved 2019-05-03.
  88. "Research Survey". Mprcenter.org. Retrieved 2012-04-24. One of the tenets of social media is that you can't control your message, you can only participate in the conversation.
  89. "Most famous social network sites worldwide as of January 2018, ranked by number of active users (in millions)". Statista. Retrieved 2018-03-07.
  90. "Facebook MAU worldwide 2021". Statista. Retrieved 2021-12-31.
  91. "Twitter: most users by country". Statista. Retrieved 2021-12-31.
  92. Stephen, Andrew T.; Galak, Jeff (2012-10-01). "The Effects of Traditional and Social Earned Media on Sales: A Study of a Microlending Marketplace". Journal of Marketing Research. 49 (5): 624–639. doi:10.1509/jmr.09.0401. ISSN 0022-2437. S2CID 167535488.
  93. Chaffey, Dave; Ellis-Chadwick, Fiona (2012). Digital Marketing (5th ed.). Pearson. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-273-74610-2.
  94. Sorescu, Alina; Frambach, Ruud T.; Singh, Jagdip; Rangaswamy, Arvind; Bridges, Cheryl (July 2011). "Innovations in Retail Business Models". Journal of Retailing. 87: S3–S16. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2011.04.005. S2CID 27878657.
  95. Shu-Chuan, Chu (2011). "VIRAL ADVERTISING IN SOCIAL MEDIA: PARTICIPATION IN FACEBOOK GROUPS AND RESPONSES AMONG COLLEGE-AGED USERS" (PDF). Journal of Interactive Advertising. 12 (1): 32. Retrieved 2018-03-07.
  96. Hardy, Kevin (June 18, 2018). "Wendy's Roasts its Way to Social Media Stardom". qsrmagazine.com. Retrieved 2018-06-18.
  97. "Explore the Best Wendysmascot Art | DeviantArt". www.deviantart.com. Retrieved 2021-12-31.
  98. Linnea, Laestadius; Wahl, Megan; Pokhrel, Pallav; Cho, Young (2019). "From Apple to Werewolf: A content analysis of marketing for e-liquids on Instagram". Addictive Behaviors. 91: 119–127. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.09.008. PMC 6358470. PMID 30253933.
  99. Newman, Daniel. "Love It Or Hate It: Influencer Marketing Works". Forbes. Retrieved 2017-11-11.
  100. Dunkley, Lydia. "Reaching The Zolom's Children: Harnessing the Power of Digital Influencers in Film Publicity". Journal of Promotional Communications. Retrieved 2017-11-11.
  101. "FTC Releases Advertising Disclosures Guidance for Online Influencers". Federal Trade Commission. 2019-11-05. Retrieved 2021-05-14.
  102. "INFLUENCER | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary". dictionary.cambridge.org. Retrieved 2019-01-25.
  103. Wang, Xia; Yu, Chunling; Wei, Yujie (November 2012). "Social Media Peer Communication and Impacts on Purchase Intentions: A Consumer Socialization Framework" (PDF). Journal of Interactive Marketing. 26 (4): 198–208. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2011.11.004. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-12-15.
  104. Compare: Rainie, Lee; Wellman, Barry (27 April 2012). "The Internet Revolution". Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press (published 2012). p. 71. ISBN 978-0-262-30040-7. Retrieved 10 January 2021. [...] Witt soon became an active content creator with no intermediary needed. He started blogging in 2003 [...].
  105. Rosen, Jay. "The People Formally Known as the Audience". PressThink. Retrieved 2015-01-27. This post came out of reflections after BloggerCon IV (June 23–24, 'empowering the users') [...].
  106. Philip Pond and Jeff Lewis. 2019. "Riots and Twitter: Connective Politics, Social Media, and Framing Discourses in the Digital Space". Information, Communication & Society. V22, N2, 213-231
  107. Newman, N.; Levy, D. (2013). "Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2013" (PDF). reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-12-07.
  108. Howard, Philip N.; Busch, Laura; Sheets, Penelope (2010-02-05). "Comparing Digital Divides: Internet Access and Social Inequality in Canada and the United States". Canadian Journal of Communication. 35 (1). doi:10.22230/cjc.2010v35n1a2192. ISSN 1499-6642.
  109. Leyva, Rodolfo (August 2017). "Exploring UK Millennials' Social Media Consumption Patterns and Participation in Elections, Activism, and "Slacktivism"". Social Science Computer Review. 35 (4): 462–479. doi:10.1177/0894439316655738. S2CID 62913580.
  110. Anderson, Nate; Technica, Ars (January 14, 2011). "Tweeting Tyrants Out of Tunisia: Global Internet at Its Best". Wired.
  111. Kirkpatrick, David D. (February 9, 2011). "Wired and Shrewd, Young Egyptians Guide Revolt". The New York Times.
  112. "The Arab Uprising's Cascading Effects". Miller-mccune.com. February 23, 2011. Archived from the original on 2011-02-27. Retrieved 2012-04-24.
  113. Compare: Rainie, Lee; Wellman, Barry (27 April 2012). "The Internet Revolution". Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press (published 2012). p. 207. ISBN 9780262300407. Retrieved 10 January 2021. Social media - Facebook, Twitter, and email - plus mobile phones played a major part in the 'Arab Spring' of protests and rebellions against authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and North Africa throughout 2011. The activity of networked individuals in Tunisia, Egypt, and other states was a prime example of how online content creation and community building, in tandem with offline gatherings and backstage maneuvering, can aid mass mobilizations.
  114. Gladwell, Malcolm (March 1, 2011). "Malcolm Gladwell and Clay Shirky on Social Media and Revolution, Foreign Affairs March/April 2011". Foreign Affairs (March/April 2011). Archived from the original on 2011-02-01. Retrieved 2012-04-24.
  115. 115.0 115.1 Victoria A. Dounoucos; D. Sunshine Hillygus; Caroline Carlson (2019). "The Message and the Medium: An Experimental Evaluation of the Effects of Twitter Commentary on Campaign Messages". Journal of Information Technology and Politics. 16 (1): 66–76. doi:10.1080/19331681.2019.1572566. S2CID 150478043.
  116. Glenn W. Richardson, Jr., ed. Social Media and Politics: A New Way to Participate in the Political Process. Volume 1. Praeger, Santa Barbara, California, 2017.
  117. Mauro Barisione and Asimina Michailidou, eds. "Do We Need to Rethink EU Politics in the Social Media Era?" in Social Media and European Politics, New York: Palgrave. Pages 1-23, 2017.
  118. Shirky, Clay (2011). "Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change". Foreign Affairs. 90 (1). Retrieved 2018-08-04.
  119. P.W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking. Like War: The Weaponization of Social Media. Houghton Mifflin, NY, 2018.
  120. Ajbaili, Mustapha (June 24, 2014). "How ISIS conquered social media". Al Arabiya News.
  121. Proofpoint, Inc. (January 17, 2018). "Q4 2016 & Year in Review: Threat Summary" (PDF). Proofpoint.
  122. Podcasts; Daily, Wharton Business; America, North. "How Social Media Is Shaping Political Campaigns". Knowledge@Wharton. Retrieved 2021-04-15. {{cite web}}: |first2= has generic name (help)
  123. "Trump's tirades about Hillary Clinton's emails are catching on — in Saudi Arabia". Washington Post. Retrieved 13 October 2020.
  124. "Tweet by Pragmatic Grizzly". Twitter.com. Retrieved 14 October 2020.
  125. "Twitter suspends accounts linked to Saudi spying case". Reuters. Retrieved 20 October 2019.
  126. "Bahrain's Social Media Problem: The Government's Online to Real Life Attack on Human Rights". New York Center For Foreign Policy Affairs. Retrieved 13 May 2021.
  127. Marche, S. (2012). "Is Facebook Making Us Lonely?". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2013-07-12.
  128. Burke for Silicon Republic, Elaine (May 30, 2013). "1 in 10 young people losing out on jobs because of pics and comments on social media".
  129. Guillory, J.; Hancock, J. T. (2012). "The effect of Linkedin on deception in resumes". Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 15 (3): 135–140. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0389. PMID 22335544.
  130. "Social media for scientists". Nature Cell Biology. 20 (12): 1329. 2018. doi:10.1038/s41556-018-0253-6. PMID 30482942. S2CID 53744344.
  131. Liang, Xuan & Su, Leona Yi-Fan & Yeo, Sara & Scheufele, Dietram & Brossard, Dominique & Xenos, Michael & Nealey, Paul & Corley, Elizabeth. (2014). Building Buzz: (Scientists) Communicating Science in New Media Environments. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly.
  132. National Academies Of Sciences, Engineering; Division of Behavioral Social Sciences Education; Committee on the Science of Science Communication: A Research Agenda (2017). Communicating Science Effectively. doi:10.17226/23674. ISBN 978-0-309-45102-4. PMID 28406600.
  133. Shafer, M.S. (2012). Online communication on climate change and climate politics: A literature review. WIREs: Climate Change, 3(6), 527-543.
  134. Haustein, Stefanie (2016). "Grand challenges in altmetrics: Heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies". Scientometrics. 108: 413–423. arXiv:1603.04939. Bibcode:2016arXiv160304939H. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1910-9. S2CID 2169363.
  135. Jha, Rajesh Kumar; Shah, Dev Kumar; Basnet, Sangharshila; Paudel, Keshab Raj; Sah, Phoolgen; Sah, Ajit Kumar; Adhikari, Kishor (2016). "Facebook use and its effects on the life of health science students in a private medical college of Nepal". BMC Research Notes. 9: 378. doi:10.1186/s13104-016-2186-0. PMC 4970301. PMID 27485717.
  136. "ACLU-MN Files Lawsuit Against Minnewaska Area Schools". www.aclu-mn.org. March 2017. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
  137. "Employers, Schools, and Social Networking Privacy". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
  138. Leenheer, Jorna; van Heerde, Harald J.; Bijmolt, Tammo H. A.; Smidts, Ale (March 1, 2007). "Do loyalty programs really enhance behavioral loyalty? An empirical analysis accounting for self-selecting members". International Journal of Research in Marketing. 24 (1): 31–47. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.632.183. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.10.005. S2CID 168005053.
  139. "Kaplan Test Prep Online Pressroom » Kaplan Test Prep Survey: More College Admissions Officers Checking Applicants' Digital Trails, But Most Students Unconcerned". kaptest.com. October 31, 2013.
  140. "The First Amendment, Social Media and College Admissions". UF College of Journalism and Communications. Retrieved 2021-12-31.
  141. 141.0 141.1 141.2 "5 Court Cases Where Social Media Played a Part". Blog Herald. August 24, 2017. Retrieved 2018-10-27.
  142. 142.0 142.1 142.2 Raymer, Elizabeth (September 24, 2018). "The (social media) evidence is clear". www.canadianlawyermag.com. Canadian Lawyer. Retrieved 2018-10-27.
  143. Zhou, Wei-Xing; Leidig, Mathias; Teeuw, Richard M. (2015). "Quantifying and Mapping Global Data Poverty". PLOS ONE. 10 (11): e0142076. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1042076L. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0142076. PMC 4641581. PMID 26560884.
  144. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). (1995). "Falling through the net: A survey of the have nots in rural and urban America".
  145. Graham, M. (July 2011). "Time machines and virtual portals: The spatialities of the digital divide". Progress in Development Studies. 11 (3): 211–227. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.659.9379. doi:10.1177/146499341001100303. S2CID 17281619.
  146. Reilley, Collen A. (January 2011). "Teaching Wikipedia as a Mirrored Technology". First Monday. 16 (1–3). doi:10.5210/fm.v16i1.2824.
  147. Reinhart, J.; Thomas, E.; Toriskie, J. (2011). "K-12 Teachers: Technology Use and the Second Level Digital Divide". Journal of Instructional Psychology. 38 (3/4): 181.
  148. Kontos, Emily Z.; Emmons, Karen M.; Puleo, Elaine; Viswanath, K. (2010). "Communication Inequalities and Public Health Implications of Adult Social Networking Site Use in the United States". Journal of Health Communication. 15 (Suppl 3): 216–235. doi:10.1080/10810730.2010.522689. PMC 3073379. PMID 21154095.
  149. Hilary Heuler. "Who really wins from Facebook's 'free internet' plan for Africa?". ZDNet.
  150. Leo Mirani (February 9, 2015). "Millions of Facebook users have no idea they're using the internet". Quartz.
  151. "Eric Ehrmann: Uruguay Prodded by G-20 to End Bank Secrecy". Huffingtonpost.com. December 14, 2011. Retrieved 2013-06-16.
  152. "News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2018". Pew Research Center. September 10, 2018. Retrieved 2018-12-08.
  153. 153.0 153.1 153.2 Hayat, Tsahi; Samuel-Azran, Tal (April 3, 2017). ""You too, Second Screeners?" Second Screeners' Echo Chambers During the 2016 U.S. Elections Primaries". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 61 (2): 291–308. doi:10.1080/08838151.2017.1309417. ISSN 0883-8151. S2CID 148973729.
  154. A Critical Appraisal of the Twitterverse. Information Systems: Behavioral & Social Methods eJournal. Accessed 28 April 2020.
  155. Evans and Clark, Heather and Jennifer (2016). "'You Tweet Like a Girl!': How Female Candidates Campaign on Twitter". American Politics Research. 44 (2): 326. doi:10.1177/1532673X15597747. S2CID 155159860.
  156. Evans and Clark, Heather and Jennifer (2016). "'You Tweet Like a Girl!': How Female Candidates Campaign on Twitter". American Politics Research. 44 (2): 343. doi:10.1177/1532673X15597747. S2CID 155159860.
  157. 157.0 157.1 157.2 Volfovsky, Alexander; Merhout, Friedolin; Mann, Marcus; Lee, Jaemin; Hunzaker, M. B. Fallin; Chen, Haohan; Bumpus, John P.; Brown, Taylor W.; Argyle, Lisa P. (September 11, 2018). "Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115 (37): 9216–9221. doi:10.1073/pnas.1804840115. ISSN 1091-6490. PMC 6140520. PMID 30154168.
  158. 158.0 158.1 158.2 158.3 Diehl, Trevor; Weeks, Brian E; Gil de Zúñiga, Homero (July 9, 2016). "Political persuasion on social media: Tracing direct and indirect effects of news use and social interaction". New Media & Society. 18 (9): 1875–1895. doi:10.1177/1461444815616224. ISSN 1461-4448. S2CID 7876343.
  159. 159.0 159.1 159.2 159.3 Greenwood, Molly M.; Sorenson, Mary E.; Warner, Benjamin R. (April 2016). "Ferguson on Facebook: Political persuasion in a new era of media effects". Computers in Human Behavior. 57: 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.003. ISSN 0747-5632.
  160. 160.0 160.1 Lee, Jae Kook; Choi, Jihyang; Kim, Cheonsoo; Kim, Yonghwan (January 30, 2014). "Social Media, Network Heterogeneity, and Opinion Polarization". Journal of Communication. 64 (4): 702–722. doi:10.1111/jcom.12077. ISSN 0021-9916.
  161. 161.0 161.1 161.2 Mihailidis, Paul; Viotty, Samantha (March 27, 2017). "Spreadable Spectacle in Digital Culture: Civic Expression, Fake News, and the Role of Media Literacies in "Post-Fact" Society". American Behavioral Scientist. 61 (4): 441–454. doi:10.1177/0002764217701217. ISSN 0002-7642. S2CID 151950124.
  162. Díaz-Fernández, Antonio M.; del-Real-Castrillo, Cristina (July 1, 2018). "Spies and security: Assessing the impact of animated videos on intelligence services in school children". Comunicar (in español). 26 (56): 81–89. doi:10.3916/c56-2018-08. ISSN 1134-3478.
  163. Basow, susan A. (1992). Gender : stereotypes and roles (3rd ed.). Belmont CA. U.S: Thomson Brooks/ Cole Publishing Co. p. 447.
  164. Oberst, Ursala; Chamarro, Andres; Renau, Vanessa (2016). "Gender Stereotypes 2.0: Self-Representations of Adolescents on Facebook". Comunicar. 24 (48): 81–89. doi:10.3916/c48-2016-08.
  165. De Vies, D; Peter, J (2013). "Women on Display: The Effect of Portraying the Self Online on Women's Self-objectification". Computers in Human Behavior. 29 (4): 1, 483–1489. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.015.
  166. Manago, Adriana M.; Ward, L. Monique; Lemm, Kristi M.; Reed, Lauren; Seabrook, Rita (2014). "Facebook Involvement, Objectified Body Consciousness, Body Shame, and Sexual Assertiveness in College Women and Men". Sex Roles. 72 (1–2): 1–14. doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0441-1. S2CID 19677590.
  167. "AMPU Guide: Common Cross-cultural Communication Challenges". www.pbs.org. Retrieved 2019-12-03.
  168. Prakapienė, Dalia. "The Impact of Social Media on Intercultural Communication". Research Gate. Retrieved 3 December 2019.
  169. Saxton, Gregory D.; Niyirora, Jerome N.; Guo, Chao; Waters, Richard D. (Spring 2015). "#AdvocatingForChange: The Strategic Use of Hashtags in Social Media Advocacy". Advances in Social Work. 16: 154–169. doi:10.18060/17952.
  170. Anderson, Monica; Jiang, Jingjing (28 November 2018). "1. Teens and their experiences on social media". Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  171. Lalli, Jaideep Singh (2021-08-05). "Maryland's Underage Sexting Case: Punishing Revenge Porn Victims?: Case Analysis of In Re: S.K., 215 A.3d 300 (Md. 2019)". Journal of Victimology and Victim Justice: 25166069211033212. doi:10.1177/25166069211033212. ISSN 2516-6069. S2CID 241531975.
  172. Osterday, Mitchell (2015–2016). "Protecting Minors from Themselves: Expanding Revenge Porn Laws to Protect the Most Vulnerable". Indiana Law Review. 49 (2): 555. doi:10.18060/4806.0075.
  173. Phippen, Andy; Brennan, Maggie (2020-12-07). Sexting and Revenge Pornography: Legislative and Social Dimensions of a Modern Digital Phenomenon. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315149691. ISBN 978-1-315-14969-1. S2CID 228921617.
  174. Paat, Yok-Fong; Markham, Christine (2021-01-02). "Digital crime, trauma, and abuse: Internet safety and cyber risks for adolescents and emerging adults in the 21st century". Social Work in Mental Health. 19 (1): 18–40. doi:10.1080/15332985.2020.1845281. ISSN 1533-2985. S2CID 228869238.
  175. 175.0 175.1 "Social Media and Adolescents' and Young Adults' Mental Health". National Center for Health Research. 2018-08-10. Retrieved 2020-02-29.
  176. O'Keeffe, Gwenn; Clarke-Pearson, Kathleen (2011). "The Impact of Social Media on Children, Adolescents, and Families" (PDF). Pediatrics. 127 (4): 800–804. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0054. PMID 21444588. S2CID 56801712.
  177. "What happens to social media after you die". NewsComAu. 2018-12-30. Retrieved 2020-11-27.
  178. 178.0 178.1 "Social Media Accounts After a Loved One Dies". Beyond. 2017-03-08. Retrieved 2020-11-27.
  179. "How to contact Twitter about a deceased family member's account". help.twitter.com. Retrieved 2020-11-28.
  180. "Instagram Help Center". help.instagram.com. Retrieved 2020-12-01.
  181. "Deceased LinkedIn Member". LinkedIn Help. Retrieved 2020-12-01.
  182. "Submit a request regarding a deceased user's account". google.account.help.com.

Further reading[edit]

Information red.svg
Scan the QR code to donate via UPI
Dear reader, We kindly request your support in maintaining the independence of Bharatpedia. As a non-profit organization, we rely heavily on small donations to sustain our operations and provide free access to reliable information to the world. We would greatly appreciate it if you could take a moment to consider donating to our cause, as it would greatly aid us in our mission. Your contribution would demonstrate the importance of reliable and trustworthy knowledge to you and the world. Thank you.

Please select an option below or scan the QR code to donate
₹150 ₹500 ₹1,000 ₹2,000 ₹5,000 ₹10,000 Other