Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Communications

The European Journal of Communication Research

Ed. by Averbeck-Lietz, Stefanie / d'Haenens, Leen


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.744
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.147

CiteScore 2018: 0.86

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.460
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.580

Online
ISSN
1613-4087
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Ahead of print

Issues

The meanings of sharing: On Facebook sharing strategies among Polish migrants in Germany and the UK

Kamil Filipek
Published Online: 2019-03-27 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-2031

Abstract

Sharing on social media has become a daily routine for millions of users worldwide. Sharing transforms the experience of international migration as it enables migrants to maintain social relations and adapt to a new socioeconomic environment. But what does the term “sharing” mean for migrants active on Facebook? What are the contemporary meanings of sharing encouraged by Facebook’s affordances? This paper explores individual sharing strategies on Facebook among Polish migrants in Germany and the UK. On the basis of the material collected through in-depth interviews (N=17) with Poles who have settled in Germany and the UK, it is proposed that the contemporary meaning of sharing has five dimensions: commercial, altruistic, social, connective and addictive. Different compositions of these dimensions can be found in most sharing practices on social media. Following a critique of commercial sharing on social media, it is further established that selling and other profit-driven activities are rather well recognized by the interviewees. However, some of them engage in commercial sharing with no direct selling intention. The article emphasizes that sharing practices help Polish migrants adapt to their bicultural reality in Germany and the UK

Keywords: Facebook; sharing; migrants

Support for this research was provided by the National Science Centre (NCN), Poland, through Grant No. 2014/12/S/HS6/00390.

  • Alencar, A. (2017). Refugee integration and social media: A local and experiential perspective. Information Communication and Society, 21(11), 1588–1603.Google Scholar

  • Andreassen, C. S., Torsheim, T., Brunborg, G. S., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychological Reports, 110(2), 501–517.Google Scholar

  • Baborska-Narożny, M., Stirling, E., & Stevenson, F. (2016). Exploring the relationship between a “Facebook group” and face-to-face interactions in “weak-tie” residential communities. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Social Media & Society – SMSociety, 1–8: ACM Press.Google Scholar

  • Bakardjieva, M. (2014). Social media and the McDonaldization of friendship. Communications, 39(4), 369–387.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595–1600.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Booth, P. (2010). Digital fandom: New media studies. Peter Lang – Digital Formations. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Botsman, R. (2015). Defining the sharing economy: What is collaborative consumption – and what isn’t? Fast Company, 1–20.Google Scholar

  • Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s mine is yours. The rise of collaborative consumption. New York: Harper Business.Google Scholar

  • boyd, d. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), Networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39–58). New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Bucher, E., Fieseler, C., & Lutz, C. (2016). What’s mine is yours (for a nominal fee) – Exploring the spectrum of utilitarian to altruistic motives for internet-mediated sharing. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 316–326.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Buczynski, B. (2013). Sharing is good. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Burrell, K. (2010). Staying, returning, working and living: Key themes in current academic research undertaken in the UK on migration movements from Eastern Europe. Social Identities, 16(3), 297–308.Google Scholar

  • Cabassa, L. J. (2003). Measuring Acculturation: Where We Are and Where We Need to Go. Hispanic Journal Of Behavioral Sciences, 25(2), 127–146.Google Scholar

  • Cassar, C., Gauci, J. P., & Bacchi, A. (2016). Migrants’ use of social media in Malta. People for Change Foundation. Retrieved 08/25/2017 from http://www.pfcmalta.org/uploads/1/2/1/7/12174934/migrants_use_of_social_media_-_final_report_31-07-2016.pdf.Google Scholar

  • Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181–195.Google Scholar

  • Cirucci, A. M. (2015). Facebook’s affordances, visible culture, and anti-anonymity. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Social Media & Society – SMSociety, 1–5: ACM Press.Google Scholar

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded Theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.Google Scholar

  • Dekker, R., & Engbersen, G. (2014). How social media transform migrant networks and facilitate migration. Global Networks, 14(4), 401–418.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Fihel, A., & Górny, A. (2013). To settle or to leave again? Patterns of return migration to Poland during the transition period. Central and Eastern European Migration Review, 2(1), 55–76.Google Scholar

  • Filipek, K. (2016). Sharing resources on Facebook groups: Polish emigrants in Germany, Norway and UK. Konteksty Społeczne/Social Contexts, Special Issue: Rediscovering Society in the Age of Social Media, 4(1), 42–53.Google Scholar

  • Fuchs, C. (2015). Culture and economy in the age of social media. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Observations (Vol. 1). New Brunswick, London: Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar

  • Humphreys, A. (2016). Social media. Enduring principle. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Idris, Y., & Wang, Q. (2009). Affordances of Facebook for learning. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 19(2/3), 247–255.Google Scholar

  • John, N. A. (2012). Sharing and web 2.0: The emergence of a keyword. New Media & Society, 15(2), 167–182.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • John, N. A. (2013). The social logics of sharing. The Communication Review, 16(3), 113–131.Google Scholar

  • John, N. A. (2017). The age of sharing (1st ed.). Cambridge, Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar

  • Karnik, M., Oakley, I., Venkatanathan, J., Spiliotopoulos, T., & Nisi, V. (2013). Uses & gratifications of a Facebook media sharing group. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on computer-supported cooperative work (pp. 821–826).Google Scholar

  • Klausen, J. (2015). Tweeting the Jihad: Social media networks of Western foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 38(1), 1–22.Google Scholar

  • Komito, L. (2011). Social media and migration: Virtual community 2.0. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 62(6), 1075–1086.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Luthra, R. R., Platt, L., & Salamonska, J. (2014). Migrant diversity, migration motivations and early integration: The case of Poles in Germany, the Netherlands, London and Dublin. LEQS Paper.Google Scholar

  • Majchrzak, A., Faraj, S., Kane, G. C., & Azad, B. (2013). The contradictory influence of social media affordances on online communal knowledge sharing, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 38–55.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Meikle, G. (2016). Social media. Communication, sharing and visibility. London,d New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Nix, J., Smith, M. R., Petrocelli, M., Rojek, J., & Manjarrez, V. M. (2016). The use of social media by alleged members of Mexican cartels and affiliated drug trafficking organizations. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 13(3), 395–418.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, Conventions, and Design. Interactions, 6(3), 38–42.Google Scholar

  • Norman, D. A. (2008). The way I see it. Signifiers, not affordances. Interactions, 15(6), 18–19.Google Scholar

  • Novick, G. (2008). Is there a bias against telephone interviews in qualitative research? Research in Nursing and Health, 31(4), 391–398.Google Scholar

  • Okólski, M., & Salt, J. (2014). Polish emigration to the UK after 2004: Why did so many come? Central and Eastern European Migration Review, 3(2), 1–37.Google Scholar

  • Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge, London: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Reips, U. D., & Buffardi, L. E. (2012). Studying migrants with the help of the internet: Methods from psychology. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(9), 1405–1424.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Schwartz, S. J., & Unger, J. B. (2010). Biculturalism and context: What is biculturalism, and when is it adaptive? Human Development, 53(1), 26–32.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Shuy, R. W. (2003) In-person versus telephone interviewing. In Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (Eds.) Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns (pp. 175–193). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

  • Sumption, M. (2009). Social networks and Polish immigration to the UK. Economics of migration working paper (Vol. 5). Retrieved: 05/12/2018 from http://ethnopedia.org.uk/resources/social_networks_polish_immigration.pdfGoogle Scholar

  • Titzmann, P. F., & Fuligni, A. J. (2015). Immigrants’ adaptation to different cultural settings: A contextual perspective on acculturation. International Journal of Psychology, 50(6), 407–412.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity. A critical history of social media. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Widlok, T. (2013). Sharing: Allowing others to take what is valued. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 3(2), 11–31.Google Scholar

  • Zhao, Y., Liu, J., Tang, J., & Zhu, Q. (2013). Conceptualizing perceived affordances in social media interaction design. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 65(3), 289–302.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2019-03-27


Citation Information: Communications, ISSN (Online) 1613-4087, ISSN (Print) 0341-2059, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-2031.

Export Citation

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in