Understanding the Platform Logics of Alternative Social Media Sites

Up next in this AoIR 2022 session is my temporary University of Zürich colleague Daniela Mahl, whose focus is on conspiracy theories. The culture of such conspiracy theories has changed recently: they are more visible and circulate more quickly now, and new and unique subcultures have emerged that engage with them. The logics and connectivity of digital platforms are important drivers of these developments.

This has resulted in the platforming of racism and antisemitism, for instance, and in the emergence of platformed conspiracism. This emerges from the confluence of the specificities of the platforms themselves, and the emergent practices of their users. Platform specificities are determined by the technological features, business models, and governance structures of these platforms; conspiracism-related user practices translate these dimensions into the communication of conspiracy theories (via platform vernaculars), the capitalisation of conspiracy theories (through self-branding and micr-celebrity), and the insulation of conspiracism (via re-platforming of content from one platform to another).

This framework can be explored in practical research, focussing here especially on alternative platforms such as BitChute and Gab. The project investigated these platforms’ interfaces, business models, and governance guidelines, as well as the user practices on these platforms, focussing on 18 conspiracy channels on BitChute and 18 conspiracy accounts on Gab.

Both platforms are positioned as alternatives to mainstream platforms by offering similar features to YouTube and Twitter, respectively, and Gab in particular shows signs of an infrastructuralisation that has imported and copied features from a variety of other platforms. Both platforms are financed by their communities, and thus distance themselves from Big Tech business models; and both also pretend that there is no moderation on these platforms and make substantial appeals to a twisted version of ‘free speech’ in their governance documents.

Users, in turn, employ a variety of practices in communicating conspiracism. On BitChute, this is focussed on ‘truth construction’ by interviewing fringe ‘experts’; by identity building through a focus on othering and vernacular signifiers of difference from the mainstream; by calls to action to ‘dig deeper’ and mobilise; and by crowdsourcing from external sources. On Gab, in addition to these, strong entertainment elements are also present: users promote conspiracy theories in engaging and funny ways as well.

On BitChute, third-party payment services are used to monetise content; Gab has an on-site marketplace. Both can be used for the self-commodification of users. Finally, both are used to develop a collective network of conspiracism and diversify the conspiracists’ presence beyond the mainstream social media platforms. This underscores the strategic positioning of these platforms in the overall social media ecosystem, and produces unique and difference user practices. They offer a refuge for users who have been deplatformed from the major social media sites.