The final panel on this day at AoIR 2018 is on journalism, and starts with Òscar Coromina. His focus is on the influence that trending topics on Twitter had on journalistic coverage of the Catalan independence referendum. Trending topics are important in directing user attention, especially in the context of breaking news, and Twitter is of course also selling advertising at the top of its trending topics list, indicating their importance.

The next speaker in this AoIR 2018 session is Luke Heemsbergen, whose interest is in the evolution of radical leaking online, after the initial WikiLeaks moment. Originally, circa 2007, the platform suggested the possibility of a new form of radical transparency, yet for WikiLeaks itself that moment subsequently passed because of the way it has evolved further; other, more recent platforms have stepped into that breach to offer alternative models, however.

The next session at AoIR 2018 starts with Daniel Trottier’s paper on on digital vigilantism. He begins with the story of a video of an elderly woman in the Netherlands who was captured on in-store CCTV pocketing a lost wallet; that video went viral and the woman subsequently took her own life. In such cases, clearly, digital vigilantism against misbehaviour can be amplified well beyond the severity of the original offence, and can produce lasting effects on the initial culprits’ (but potentially also the accusers’) personal standing and reputation, as well as their mental and physical wellbeing. Further, because of the archival longevity of Web content, traces of such accusations may remain prominent for many years.

A month ago I was able to present the themes of my latest book Gatewatching and News Curation at the University of Sydney, as part of its Media@Sydney series of talks – my sincere thanks to Francesco Bailo, Gerard Goggin, and everyone else who made this possible. The M@S team also posted video and audio recordings of the talk, which I’m sharing below; in case the presentation is difficult to make out in the video, I’ve also included the slides themselves.

Speaking on the day of Australia’s latest partyroom spill for the Prime Ministership, this was a timely opportunity to reflect on the intersections between journalism, social media, and the public sphere, and I thoroughly enjoyed the discussions after the presentation – many thanks to everyone who came along.

More information about the new book is here: Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere.

I am the final speaker in this Social Media & Society 2018 session, presenting a paper co-authored with Christian Nuernbergk and Aljosha Karim Schapals, my colleagues in the Journalism beyond the Crisis ARC Discovery project. Here are our slides:

The third speaker in this Social Media & Society 2018 session is Johan Farkas, whose focus is on the activities of the Internet Research Agency (IRA) in St. Petersburg, described as the Russian ‘troll factory’ and indicted for its involvement in Russian interference with the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The next presenter in this Social Media & Society 2018 session is Oluwaseun Ajao, who shifts our focus to the question of ‘fake news’ on Twitter. Why is such content circulated on the platform? In part this is because these stories often generate more impact than ‘real’ news stories: this might result in significant shifts in political opinion, financial gains, or other outcomes that are desirable to the operators behind such initiatives.

The first paper session on this last day of Social Media & Society 2018 is Michaël Opgenhaffen, whose interest is in gatekeeping on social media. Gatekeeping is one of the fundamental processes in the news industry: editors and journalists choose what stories end up in the final newspaper, news bulletin, or news Website. But selection processes might now diverge across print and online news publications, and the arrival of social media as a medium for the news further complicates this picture.