In What is Digital Sociology?, Neil Selwyn offers a new overview of digital sociology, advocating for its mainstream acceptance as a valuable expansion of sociological inquiry, while dispelling the misconception that it is a entirely new or radically different form of sociology. This is an excellent introduction to digital sociology, recommends Huw Davies, that will be particularly helpful for students and any sociologist curious about the field’s scope and purpose

Davies, Huw

English

LSE Research Online

Book	Review:	What	is	Digital	Sociology?	by	NeilSelwynIn	What	is	Digital	Sociology?,	Neil	Selwyn	offers	a	new	overview	of	digital	sociology,	advocating	for	itsmainstream	acceptance	as	a	valuable	expansion	of	sociological	inquiry,	while	dispelling	the	misconception	that	it	isa	entirely	new	or	radically	different	form	of	sociology.	This	is	an	excellent	introduction	to	digital	sociology,recommends	Huw	Davies,	that	will	be	particularly	helpful	for	students	and	any	sociologist	curious	about	the	field’sscope	and	purpose.What	is	Digital	Sociology?	Neil	Selwyn.	Polity.	2019.Sometimes	it’s	useful	to	reflect	on	just	how	profoundly	digital	technology	has	changedsociety.	Recently,	while	having	a	clear	out,	I	found	my	‘Weetabix	Book	of	Facts’.	WhileI	was	growing	up	during	the	1980s	in	the	valleys	of	South	Wales,	this	was	a	referencebook	for	me	to	find	out	about	history,	science	and	nature.	Although	many	of	theconstituent	technologies	existed	back	then,	having	all	the	world’s	knowledge	availableto	me	in	digitised	books	and	articles,	podcasts,	videos	and	encyclopaedias	in	aninstant,	through	a	handset	that	was	communicating	with	satellites,	was	still	within	therealm	of	science	fiction.	In	my	lifetime,	how	we	wage	war,	how	we	do	healthcare	andnegotiate	pandemics,	how	we	shop,	form	and	conduct	relationships,	co-habit	asfamilies,	entertain	ourselves,	learn,	consume	and	interpret	news,	participate	in	politicsand	activism,	and	transmit	hate	speech,	have	all	been	transformed	by	digitaltechnology.	Data	about	our	prejudices,	our	weaknesses,	passions	and	identities	arecommodified,	processed,	exploited	and	fed	back	to	us	like	a	virtual	soylent	green	sothat	modern	robber	barons	can	accumulate	wealth	and	power	beyond	the	reach	ofnation	states.	Depending	on	our	relative	position	within	hierarchies	of	wealth	andpower,	digital	technology	can	give	us	agency	and	take	it	away.Yet,	by	many	measures	the	sociological	study	of	digital	technology	is	not	part	of	mainstream	sociology.	PeteFussey	and	Silke	Roth	have	created	a	special	issue	of	Sociology	on	digital	sociology.	However,	since	2008	theBritish	Sociological	Association’s	flagship	journal	has	published	only	six	articles	at	the	time	of	writing	that	use	digitalas	a	keyword	according	to	its	search	engine.	Why	isn’t	digital	sociology	more	established	within	and	beyondsociology?In	What	is	Digital	Sociology?,	Neil	Selwyn	argues	an	‘increasingly	blurred	distinction	between	straight-aheadsociological	work	and	the	mass	of	cognate	work’	across	other	disciplines	(vii)	is	partly	responsible:	digital	sociologyis	alive	and	well;	it’s	just	often	being	done	elsewhere,	outside	of	mainstream	sociology.	In	contrast	to	Sociology,from	2008,	the	journal	New	Media	and	Society	has	published	314	articles	that	mention	‘sociology’	in	its	keywords.Many	of	the	researchers	that	one	of	my	fellow	digital	sociology	study	conveners,	Chris	Till,	has	interviewed	for	hisdigital	sociology	podcast	are	doing	digital	sociology	but	don’t	call	themselves	sociologists.Selwyn	also	implies	digital	sociology	is	not	mainstream	because	not	enough	people	know	what	digital	sociology	is.Many	of	those	who	have	heard	of	digital	sociology	believe	we	don’t	need	a	faddish	new	form	of	‘sociology-lite’.	Andsociologists	are	sometimes	reluctant	to	exit	their	‘comfort	zones’	(42)	to	embrace	innovation.In	this	excellent	introduction	to	digital	sociology,	particularly	for	undergraduate	and	postgraduate	students	and	anysociologist	curious	about	the	field’s	scope	and	purpose,	Selwyn	advocates	for	digital	sociology’s	mainstreamacceptance	but	he	‘dispels	any	misconception	of	digital	sociology	being	a	new,	superior	or	radically	different	form	ofsociology’.	He	doesn’t	call	for	digital	sociology	to	‘usurp	or	demean	other	areas	of	sociological	work’,	but	instead	to‘augment	and	expand	sociological	inquiry’	(112).LSE Review of Books: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 1 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-15Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2020/06/15/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/Chapter	One,	‘Promises	and	Precedents’,	begins	by	building	the	book’s	case	for	this	new	field	that	assesses	thesociological	impact	of	digital	technology.	Selwyn	pre-empts	critics	who	may	argue	digital	sociology	is	an	inferiorform	of	‘sociology-lite’	by	illustrating	how	technology	and	its	effects	have	always	been	a	concern	for	classicalsociologists	such	as	Karl	Marx,	Auguste	Comte,	Max	Weber	and	Thorstein	Veblen.	They	showed	that	technologyand	our	social	and	political	lives	are	indivisible	(which,	incidentally,	makes	me	wonder	why,	after	all	these	years,tech	determinism	is	still	a	thing!).	He	then	introduces	some	less	familiar,	twentieth-century	sociologists	oftechnology,	such	as	William	Fielding	Ogburn,	Lewis	Mumford	and	the	‘insightful	but	bleak’	(9)	Jacques	Ellul.	Weneed	a	new	form	of	sociology	because	‘the	current	wave	of	digital	technologies	is	quantitatively	and	qualitativelydistinct	from	the	technological	conditions’	(19):however	prescient	they	might	have	been,	Marx,	Ellul	and	others	were	not	contemplating	AI	or	theInternet	of	Things	in	their	argument	(19).Next,	we	are	offered	a	canter	through	STS	including	Judy	Wajcman,	Donna	Haraway	and	Sadie	Plant.	Digitalsociology’s	novelty	and	interpretive	flexibility	can	be	its	strength,	allowing	its	exponents	to	get	down	to	the	microlevel	more	than	their	forebearers:	‘digital	sociology	can	also	be	more	introspective	and	intimate	than	previoussociological	accounts	of	technology’	(19).	Equipped	with	such	expertise,	digital	sociologists	can	make	a	‘tangiblecontribution	to	building	(or	more	specifically	coding)	the	future	along	different	lines’	(20).	With	their	deep	technicalknowledge,	digital	sociologists	can	interrogate	and	change	for	the	better	the	‘coded	architectures	of	software,platforms	and	systems	and	the	programmed	nature	of	what	digital	technologies	seem	to	“do”	of	their	own	accord’(19).Chapter	Two,	‘Digital	Sociology:	Central	Concerns,	Concepts	and	Questions’,	is	about	‘reframing	the	core	technicalfeatures	of	contemporary	technologies	into	sociological	concerns’	by	‘reusing	and	reconfiguring	fundamentalquestions	and	concepts	from	the	past	100	years	of	sociological	thinking’	and	‘looking	toward	new	forms	of	hybridtheory	emerging	from	conflations	of	philosophy,	computational	sciences,	design,	politics,	urban	geography	andother	sources	of	critical	thinking’	(22).	Here,	Selwyn	answers	the	contention	that	the	more	digitised	a	societybecomes,	the	more	things	that	can	be	rendered	as	0s	and	1s,	and	the	more	we	take	the	tech	for	granted,	the	lesswe	need	a	specialist	field	of	sociology	to	study	digital	technology:	‘retaining	the	prefix	of	digital	reflects	acommitment	to	continuing	to	notice	what	has	now	largely	become	invisible’	(23).	‘Instead	contemporary	society	isbetter	understood	as	an	entanglement	of	humanity,	materiality	and	digitality’	(24).	The	chapter	goes	on	to	cite	manysociologists	who	should	be	familiar	to	followers	of	@BSADigitalSoc	to	make	sociological	sense	of	‘networks’,‘platforms’,	‘data’,	‘algorithms	and	automation’.LSE Review of Books: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 2 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-15Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2020/06/15/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/This	chapter’s	section	on	‘the	(re)use	of	social	theory	in	digital	sociology’	explores	digital	Marxist	theory,	platformcapitalism	and	digital	labour	as	well	as	digital	sources	of	resistance.	Selwyn	assesses	the	relevance	of	‘pre-digital’theorists	including	Michel	Foucault,	Gilles	Deleuze,	Erving	Goffman	and	Pierre	Bourdieu.	He	then	argues:the	best	digital	theory-building	of	the	past	decade	stems	from	social	and	computational	origins.	As	such,it	is	increasingly	apparent	that	digital	sociologists	need	to	develop	a	computational	as	well	as	asociological	imagination	(42).This	includes	engaging	with	thinkers	such	as	McKenzie	Wark,	Ian	Bogost	and	Geert	Lovink	who	come	from	‘gamer,hacker	and	hacktivist	backgrounds’	(42).	And	an	‘avant	garde’	of	theorists	including	Benjamin	Bratton,	AlexanderGalloway	and	Wendy	Chun,	whose	work	‘is	already	proving	tremendously	generative	for	digital	sociologists	to	drawupon’	(44).	Selwyn	concludes:‘simply	adding	Foucault	to	Facebook	is	not	a	sufficient	intellectual	response	to	the	complexmachinations	of	the	digital	age’	(44).Chapter	Three	describes	two	examples	of	digital	sociology	inquiry	–	the	areas	of	digital	labour	and	digital	race.	Thischapter	includes	sections	on	the	digitisation	of	traditional	work,	new	forms	of	distributed,	discrete	work	and	socialmedia	as	sites	of	‘free	labor’	(53).	The	racialised	nature	of	digital	media	is	explored	through	a	number	of	differentstrands,	including	work	that	addresses	‘the	dynamics	of	online	interactions’	(60),	how	‘applications	and	platformsare	configured	in	ways	that	prompt	and	perpetuate	racialized	dynamics’	(61),	race	and	the	digital	formation	ofcollective	identity.	Here,	Selwyn	cites	many	of	the	leading	lights	on	digital	race	such	as	André	Brock,	TressieMcMillan	Cottom,	Jessie	Daniels,	Safiya	Umoja	Noble	and,	from	the	UK,	Sanjay	Sharma,	who	all	discuss	how	thedominant	platforms	perpetuate	and	monetise	racism.	I	would	urge	readers	to	also	look	up	Ruha	Benjamin’s	work.Since	Selwyn	writes	that	‘Chapter	3’s	indicative	discussions	of	digital	race	and	digital	labour	are	intended	to	inspirereaders	to	delve	into	other	literatures	on	equally	significant	topics’,	on	gender,	I	would	recommend,	for	example,these	books	on	Data	Feminism	and	the	history	of	women	in	UK	computing.Chapter	Four,	‘Digital	Methods	and	Methodology’,	inevitably	includes	a	dialogue	with	Mike	Savage	and	RogerBurrows	(2007),	deals	with	big	data	and	the	computational	social	sciences,	how	‘commercial	sociology’	(71)	isinnovating	its	methods,	describes	the	affordances	and	limitations	of	large-scale	social	media	data	from	platformssuch	as	Twitter	and	cites	‘topic	modelling’	as	one	particular	area	of	interest	(75).	Here	Selwyn	also	discusses	‘thickdata’,	‘the	digital	ethnographic	turn’	(78)	and	‘ethnographies	of	online	communities’	(80).	The	next	section	oncoding,	programming	and	software	development	addresses	the	‘burgeoning	trend	of	research	based	around	thedesign,	development	and	implementation	of	software	and	coded	artifacts’	(82).	These	are	‘driving	impetus	for	digitalsociology	[…]	to	engage	in	design	and	implementation	of	software	that	is	likely	to	push	boundaries	and	test	thelimits	of	coded	environments’	(83),	and	to	‘act	to	repurpose	digital	tools	away	from	(and	even	against)	commerciallogics	and	imperatives	of	dominant	platforms’	(87).	While	these	discrete	chapters	help	make	sense	of	digitalsociology,	the	themes	they	address	are	often	indivisible.	For	example,	an	awful	lot	of	digital	sociology’s	‘cognatework’,	particularly	by	its	more	positivist	and	computational	cousins,	has	a	problem	that	Gurminder	Bhambra	callsmethodological	whiteness.LSE Review of Books: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 3 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-15Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2020/06/15/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/The	final	chapter	‘reflects	on	the	craft,	scholarship	and	practice	of	digital	sociology’	(92).	‘Unlike	their	colleagues	insome	other	areas	of	sociology’,	digital	sociologists,	we	are	told,	‘are	less	concerned’	with	‘sociological	clique’	or	theinstitution	where	they	‘happen	to	be	employed’	(93).	And,	‘many	digital	sociologists	are	happy	to	spend	time	riffingideas	on	Twitter	and	later	rounding	these	up	to	a	few	‘‘blog-worthy’’	paragraphs’	(96).	Selwyn	says	there	is	‘much	toadmire’	in	such	practices,	but	the	digital	scholar	is	sometimes	‘tone-deaf	to	the	politics	of	contemporary	academicwork’,	including	‘performativity	and	affect’	and	‘issues	that	digital	sociologists	are	well	used	to	discussing	withregard	to	other	people’s	digital	media	use’	(105).It’s	true	that	the	ideal	digital	scholar	is	the	neoliberal	university’s	teacher’s	pet:	the	winner	in	the	Altmetric	Olympics.But,	during	my	seven	years	of	involvement	in	@BSADigitalSoc,	I	haven’t	encountered	any	digital	sociologists	whoaren’t	acutely	and	reflexively	aware	that	there	‘is	the	growing	co-opting	of	these	forms	of	digital	scholarship	intoforms	of	performativity,	accountability	and	measurement-based	management	that	now	pervade	contemporaryacademia’	(106).	There	are	more	salient	examples	of	academics	who	have	failed	this	reflexivity	test	embodied	inparodies	such	as	@ProfBritPol_PhD.Selwyn	also	argues	that	‘despite	being	well	aware	of	the	phenomenon,	digital	sociologists	are	not	immune	to	thesocial	media	phenomenon	of	‘‘filter	bubbles’”	(109).	While	there	may	be	some	truth	in	this,	to	get	a	broaderperspective	and	for	research	purposes	many	digital	sociologists,	including	myself,	deliberately	venture	outside	ourfilter	bubbles	to	observe	how	people	with	different	politics,	epistemologies	and	world	views	think	and	behave.	I	alsofeel	I’m	one	of	the	lucky	ones	who	experiences	Twitter	as	more	of	‘a	supportive	community’	than	‘self-congratulatory,	smug	clique’	(109).However,	aside	from	these	quibbles,	if	after	reading	this	book	you	are	still	unconvinced	of	digital	sociology’s	value,you	probably	never	will	be.	The	digital	turn	engages	every	level	of	sociological	analysis:	macro,	meso	and	micro.Therefore,	‘digital	sociologists	should	feel	at	ease	in	switching	between	continental	and	computational	philosophyand	in	harboring	interests	in	Marx	and	machine	learning’	(44).	Given	that	‘digital	technology	is	entwined	with	issuesof	race,	sexuality,	disability	and	intersections	therein’	(19),	there	is	an	opportunity	for	sociology	to	draw	on	its	richtraditions	and	claim	this	space,	make	a	virtue	of	digital	sociology’s	ability	to	access	a	smorgasbord	of	methods	andtheories	and	become	the	‘go-to’	discipline	for	the	study	of	digital	technology’s	effects	on	society	(and	vice	versa).Borrowing	a	metaphor	from	software	engineering	(a	‘full	stack	developer’	can	programme	the	front	end	and	backend	of	computing	systems),	by	addressing	macro,	meso	and	micro	layers	of	socio-technical	systems	–	from	thealgorithms	they	execute	to	their	political	economy	to	their	socio-emotional	consequences	–	digital	sociology,	as	adiscipline,	offers	a	full	stack	critique	of	the	digitised	society.LSE Review of Books: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 4 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-15Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2020/06/15/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/Given	there	are	so	few	opportunities	for	young	people	to	critically	evaluate	the	technologies	that	they	engage	withevery	day,	the	case	for	digital	sociology	has	never	been	stronger.	Moreover,	particularly	at	a	time	when	so	muchduff	sociology	(such	as	‘taboo	busting’	race	pseudoscience)	is	in	circulation,	public	interest	in	digital	technologyoffers	further	opportunities	to	show	what	rigorous,	cutting-edge	sociology	is	capable	of	contributing	to	contemporarypublic	discourse.Besides	digest	and	distribute	this	book,	what	can	those	of	us	who	are	convinced	digital	sociology	has	value	dowithin	the	academy	to	institute	digital	sociology?	It’s	worth	noting	that	most	of	the	digital	sociologists	cited	in	thisbook	who	are	pushing	the	boundaries	of	sociology	(including	Noortje	Marres,	Susan	Halford,	Helen	Kennedy,	KateOrton-Johnson,	Karen	Gregory,	Jessie	Daniels,	Tara	Stamm	and	Tressie	McMillan	Cottom)	are	women	who	aredoing	the	work	behind	the	scenes.	They	are	often	sacrificing	research	time,	taking	on	extra	responsibilities	andfighting	institutional	inertia	to	develop	digital	sociology	courses,	form	research	clusters	and	put	on	events.	If	digitalsociology	is	going	to	succeed,	they	need	everyone’s	support.Note:	This	review	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	the	LSE	Review	of	Books	blog,	or	of	theLondon	School	of	Economics.Image	One	Credit:	Image	by	Gerd	Altmann	from	Pixabay.Image	Two	Credit:	Image	by	Gerd	Altmann	from	Pixabay.	LSE Review of Books: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 5 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-15Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2020/06/15/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/

Book review: What is digital sociology? by Neil Selwyn

In What is Digital Sociology?, Neil Selwyn offers a new overview of digital sociology, advocating for its mainstream acceptance as a valuable expansion of sociological inquiry, while dispelling the misconception that it is a entirely new or radically different form of sociology

Book	Review:	What	is	Digital	Sociology?	by	NeilSelwynIn	What	is	Digital	Sociology?,	Neil	Selwyn	offers	a	new	overview	of	digital	sociology,	advocating	for	itsmainstream	acceptance	as	a	valuable	expansion	of	sociological	inquiry,	while	dispelling	the	misconception	that	it	isa	entirely	new	or	radically	different	form	of	sociology.	This	is	an	excellent	introduction	to	digital	sociology,recommends	Huw	Davies,	that	will	be	particularly	helpful	for	students	and	any	sociologist	curious	about	the	field’sscope	and	purpose.What	is	Digital	Sociology?	Neil	Selwyn.	Polity.	2019.Sometimes	it’s	useful	to	reflect	on	just	how	profoundly	digital	technology	has	changedsociety.	Recently,	while	having	a	clear	out,	I	found	my	‘Weetabix	Book	of	Facts’.	WhileI	was	growing	up	during	the	1980s	in	the	valleys	of	South	Wales,	this	was	a	referencebook	for	me	to	find	out	about	history,	science	and	nature.	Although	many	of	theconstituent	technologies	existed	back	then,	having	all	the	world’s	knowledge	availableto	me	in	digitised	books	and	articles,	podcasts,	videos	and	encyclopaedias	in	aninstant,	through	a	handset	that	was	communicating	with	satellites,	was	still	within	therealm	of	science	fiction.	In	my	lifetime,	how	we	wage	war,	how	we	do	healthcare	andnegotiate	pandemics,	how	we	shop,	form	and	conduct	relationships,	co-habit	asfamilies,	entertain	ourselves,	learn,	consume	and	interpret	news,	participate	in	politicsand	activism,	and	transmit	hate	speech,	have	all	been	transformed	by	digitaltechnology.	Data	about	our	prejudices,	our	weaknesses,	passions	and	identities	arecommodified,	processed,	exploited	and	fed	back	to	us	like	a	virtual	soylent	green	sothat	modern	robber	barons	can	accumulate	wealth	and	power	beyond	the	reach	ofnation	states.	Depending	on	our	relative	position	within	hierarchies	of	wealth	andpower,	digital	technology	can	give	us	agency	and	take	it	away.Yet,	by	many	measures	the	sociological	study	of	digital	technology	is	not	part	of	mainstream	sociology.	PeteFussey	and	Silke	Roth	have	created	a	special	issue	of	Sociology	on	digital	sociology.	However,	since	2008	theBritish	Sociological	Association’s	flagship	journal	has	published	only	six	articles	at	the	time	of	writing	that	use	digitalas	a	keyword	according	to	its	search	engine.	Why	isn’t	digital	sociology	more	established	within	and	beyondsociology?In	What	is	Digital	Sociology?,	Neil	Selwyn	argues	an	‘increasingly	blurred	distinction	between	straight-aheadsociological	work	and	the	mass	of	cognate	work’	across	other	disciplines	(vii)	is	partly	responsible:	digital	sociologyis	alive	and	well;	it’s	just	often	being	done	elsewhere,	outside	of	mainstream	sociology.	In	contrast	to	Sociology,from	2008,	the	journal	New	Media	and	Society	has	published	314	articles	that	mention	‘sociology’	in	its	keywords.Many	of	the	researchers	that	one	of	my	fellow	digital	sociology	study	conveners,	Chris	Till,	has	interviewed	for	hisdigital	sociology	podcast	are	doing	digital	sociology	but	don’t	call	themselves	sociologists.Selwyn	also	implies	digital	sociology	is	not	mainstream	because	not	enough	people	know	what	digital	sociology	is.Many	of	those	who	have	heard	of	digital	sociology	believe	we	don’t	need	a	faddish	new	form	of	‘sociology-lite’.	Andsociologists	are	sometimes	reluctant	to	exit	their	‘comfort	zones’	(42)	to	embrace	innovation.In	this	excellent	introduction	to	digital	sociology,	particularly	for	undergraduate	and	postgraduate	students	and	anysociologist	curious	about	the	field’s	scope	and	purpose,	Selwyn	advocates	for	digital	sociology’s	mainstreamacceptance	but	he	‘dispels	any	misconception	of	digital	sociology	being	a	new,	superior	or	radically	different	form	ofsociology’.	He	doesn’t	call	for	digital	sociology	to	‘usurp	or	demean	other	areas	of	sociological	work’,	but	instead	to‘augment	and	expand	sociological	inquiry’	(112).USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 1 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-22Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/22/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Chapter	One,	‘Promises	and	Precedents’,	begins	by	building	the	book’s	case	for	this	new	field	that	assesses	thesociological	impact	of	digital	technology.	Selwyn	pre-empts	critics	who	may	argue	digital	sociology	is	an	inferiorform	of	‘sociology-lite’	by	illustrating	how	technology	and	its	effects	have	always	been	a	concern	for	classicalsociologists	such	as	Karl	Marx,	Auguste	Comte,	Max	Weber	and	Thorstein	Veblen.	They	showed	that	technologyand	our	social	and	political	lives	are	indivisible	(which,	incidentally,	makes	me	wonder	why,	after	all	these	years,tech	determinism	is	still	a	thing!).	He	then	introduces	some	less	familiar,	twentieth-century	sociologists	oftechnology,	such	as	William	Fielding	Ogburn,	Lewis	Mumford	and	the	‘insightful	but	bleak’	(9)	Jacques	Ellul.	Weneed	a	new	form	of	sociology	because	‘the	current	wave	of	digital	technologies	is	quantitatively	and	qualitativelydistinct	from	the	technological	conditions’	(19):however	prescient	they	might	have	been,	Marx,	Ellul	and	others	were	not	contemplating	AI	or	theInternet	of	Things	in	their	argument	(19).Next,	we	are	offered	a	canter	through	STS	including	Judy	Wajcman,	Donna	Haraway	and	Sadie	Plant.	Digitalsociology’s	novelty	and	interpretive	flexibility	can	be	its	strength,	allowing	its	exponents	to	get	down	to	the	microlevel	more	than	their	forebearers:	‘digital	sociology	can	also	be	more	introspective	and	intimate	than	previoussociological	accounts	of	technology’	(19).	Equipped	with	such	expertise,	digital	sociologists	can	make	a	‘tangiblecontribution	to	building	(or	more	specifically	coding)	the	future	along	different	lines’	(20).	With	their	deep	technicalknowledge,	digital	sociologists	can	interrogate	and	change	for	the	better	the	‘coded	architectures	of	software,platforms	and	systems	and	the	programmed	nature	of	what	digital	technologies	seem	to	“do”	of	their	own	accord’(19).Chapter	Two,	‘Digital	Sociology:	Central	Concerns,	Concepts	and	Questions’,	is	about	‘reframing	the	core	technicalfeatures	of	contemporary	technologies	into	sociological	concerns’	by	‘reusing	and	reconfiguring	fundamentalquestions	and	concepts	from	the	past	100	years	of	sociological	thinking’	and	‘looking	toward	new	forms	of	hybridtheory	emerging	from	conflations	of	philosophy,	computational	sciences,	design,	politics,	urban	geography	andother	sources	of	critical	thinking’	(22).	Here,	Selwyn	answers	the	contention	that	the	more	digitised	a	societybecomes,	the	more	things	that	can	be	rendered	as	0s	and	1s,	and	the	more	we	take	the	tech	for	granted,	the	lesswe	need	a	specialist	field	of	sociology	to	study	digital	technology:	‘retaining	the	prefix	of	digital	reflects	acommitment	to	continuing	to	notice	what	has	now	largely	become	invisible’	(23).	‘Instead	contemporary	society	isbetter	understood	as	an	entanglement	of	humanity,	materiality	and	digitality’	(24).	The	chapter	goes	on	to	cite	manysociologists	who	should	be	familiar	to	followers	of	@BSADigitalSoc	to	make	sociological	sense	of	‘networks’,‘platforms’,	‘data’,	‘algorithms	and	automation’.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 2 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-22Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/22/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/This	chapter’s	section	on	‘the	(re)use	of	social	theory	in	digital	sociology’	explores	digital	Marxist	theory,	platformcapitalism	and	digital	labour	as	well	as	digital	sources	of	resistance.	Selwyn	assesses	the	relevance	of	‘pre-digital’theorists	including	Michel	Foucault,	Gilles	Deleuze,	Erving	Goffman	and	Pierre	Bourdieu.	He	then	argues:the	best	digital	theory-building	of	the	past	decade	stems	from	social	and	computational	origins.	As	such,it	is	increasingly	apparent	that	digital	sociologists	need	to	develop	a	computational	as	well	as	asociological	imagination	(42).This	includes	engaging	with	thinkers	such	as	McKenzie	Wark,	Ian	Bogost	and	Geert	Lovink	who	come	from	‘gamer,hacker	and	hacktivist	backgrounds’	(42).	And	an	‘avant	garde’	of	theorists	including	Benjamin	Bratton,	AlexanderGalloway	and	Wendy	Chun,	whose	work	‘is	already	proving	tremendously	generative	for	digital	sociologists	to	drawupon’	(44).	Selwyn	concludes:‘simply	adding	Foucault	to	Facebook	is	not	a	sufficient	intellectual	response	to	the	complexmachinations	of	the	digital	age’	(44).Chapter	Three	describes	two	examples	of	digital	sociology	inquiry	–	the	areas	of	digital	labour	and	digital	race.	Thischapter	includes	sections	on	the	digitisation	of	traditional	work,	new	forms	of	distributed,	discrete	work	and	socialmedia	as	sites	of	‘free	labor’	(53).	The	racialised	nature	of	digital	media	is	explored	through	a	number	of	differentstrands,	including	work	that	addresses	‘the	dynamics	of	online	interactions’	(60),	how	‘applications	and	platformsare	configured	in	ways	that	prompt	and	perpetuate	racialized	dynamics’	(61),	race	and	the	digital	formation	ofcollective	identity.	Here,	Selwyn	cites	many	of	the	leading	lights	on	digital	race	such	as	André	Brock,	TressieMcMillan	Cottom,	Jessie	Daniels,	Safiya	Umoja	Noble	and,	from	the	UK,	Sanjay	Sharma,	who	all	discuss	how	thedominant	platforms	perpetuate	and	monetise	racism.	I	would	urge	readers	to	also	look	up	Ruha	Benjamin’s	work.Since	Selwyn	writes	that	‘Chapter	3’s	indicative	discussions	of	digital	race	and	digital	labour	are	intended	to	inspirereaders	to	delve	into	other	literatures	on	equally	significant	topics’,	on	gender,	I	would	recommend,	for	example,these	books	on	Data	Feminism	and	the	history	of	women	in	UK	computing.Chapter	Four,	‘Digital	Methods	and	Methodology’,	inevitably	includes	a	dialogue	with	Mike	Savage	and	RogerBurrows	(2007),	deals	with	big	data	and	the	computational	social	sciences,	how	‘commercial	sociology’	(71)	isinnovating	its	methods,	describes	the	affordances	and	limitations	of	large-scale	social	media	data	from	platformssuch	as	Twitter	and	cites	‘topic	modelling’	as	one	particular	area	of	interest	(75).	Here	Selwyn	also	discusses	‘thickdata’,	‘the	digital	ethnographic	turn’	(78)	and	‘ethnographies	of	online	communities’	(80).	The	next	section	oncoding,	programming	and	software	development	addresses	the	‘burgeoning	trend	of	research	based	around	thedesign,	development	and	implementation	of	software	and	coded	artifacts’	(82).	These	are	‘driving	impetus	for	digitalsociology	[…]	to	engage	in	design	and	implementation	of	software	that	is	likely	to	push	boundaries	and	test	thelimits	of	coded	environments’	(83),	and	to	‘act	to	repurpose	digital	tools	away	from	(and	even	against)	commerciallogics	and	imperatives	of	dominant	platforms’	(87).	While	these	discrete	chapters	help	make	sense	of	digitalsociology,	the	themes	they	address	are	often	indivisible.	For	example,	an	awful	lot	of	digital	sociology’s	‘cognatework’,	particularly	by	its	more	positivist	and	computational	cousins,	has	a	problem	that	Gurminder	Bhambra	callsmethodological	whiteness.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 3 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-22Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/22/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/The	final	chapter	‘reflects	on	the	craft,	scholarship	and	practice	of	digital	sociology’	(92).	‘Unlike	their	colleagues	insome	other	areas	of	sociology’,	digital	sociologists,	we	are	told,	‘are	less	concerned’	with	‘sociological	clique’	or	theinstitution	where	they	‘happen	to	be	employed’	(93).	And,	‘many	digital	sociologists	are	happy	to	spend	time	riffingideas	on	Twitter	and	later	rounding	these	up	to	a	few	‘‘blog-worthy’’	paragraphs’	(96).	Selwyn	says	there	is	‘much	toadmire’	in	such	practices,	but	the	digital	scholar	is	sometimes	‘tone-deaf	to	the	politics	of	contemporary	academicwork’,	including	‘performativity	and	affect’	and	‘issues	that	digital	sociologists	are	well	used	to	discussing	withregard	to	other	people’s	digital	media	use’	(105).It’s	true	that	the	ideal	digital	scholar	is	the	neoliberal	university’s	teacher’s	pet:	the	winner	in	the	Altmetric	Olympics.But,	during	my	seven	years	of	involvement	in	@BSADigitalSoc,	I	haven’t	encountered	any	digital	sociologists	whoaren’t	acutely	and	reflexively	aware	that	there	‘is	the	growing	co-opting	of	these	forms	of	digital	scholarship	intoforms	of	performativity,	accountability	and	measurement-based	management	that	now	pervade	contemporaryacademia’	(106).	There	are	more	salient	examples	of	academics	who	have	failed	this	reflexivity	test	embodied	inparodies	such	as	@ProfBritPol_PhD.Selwyn	also	argues	that	‘despite	being	well	aware	of	the	phenomenon,	digital	sociologists	are	not	immune	to	thesocial	media	phenomenon	of	‘‘filter	bubbles’”	(109).	While	there	may	be	some	truth	in	this,	to	get	a	broaderperspective	and	for	research	purposes	many	digital	sociologists,	including	myself,	deliberately	venture	outside	ourfilter	bubbles	to	observe	how	people	with	different	politics,	epistemologies	and	world	views	think	and	behave.	I	alsofeel	I’m	one	of	the	lucky	ones	who	experiences	Twitter	as	more	of	‘a	supportive	community’	than	‘self-congratulatory,	smug	clique’	(109).However,	aside	from	these	quibbles,	if	after	reading	this	book	you	are	still	unconvinced	of	digital	sociology’s	value,you	probably	never	will	be.	The	digital	turn	engages	every	level	of	sociological	analysis:	macro,	meso	and	micro.Therefore,	‘digital	sociologists	should	feel	at	ease	in	switching	between	continental	and	computational	philosophyand	in	harboring	interests	in	Marx	and	machine	learning’	(44).	Given	that	‘digital	technology	is	entwined	with	issuesof	race,	sexuality,	disability	and	intersections	therein’	(19),	there	is	an	opportunity	for	sociology	to	draw	on	its	richtraditions	and	claim	this	space,	make	a	virtue	of	digital	sociology’s	ability	to	access	a	smorgasbord	of	methods	andtheories	and	become	the	‘go-to’	discipline	for	the	study	of	digital	technology’s	effects	on	society	(and	vice	versa).Borrowing	a	metaphor	from	software	engineering	(a	‘full	stack	developer’	can	programme	the	front	end	and	backend	of	computing	systems),	by	addressing	macro,	meso	and	micro	layers	of	socio-technical	systems	–	from	thealgorithms	they	execute	to	their	political	economy	to	their	socio-emotional	consequences	–	digital	sociology,	as	adiscipline,	offers	a	full	stack	critique	of	the	digitised	society.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 4 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-22Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/22/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Given	there	are	so	few	opportunities	for	young	people	to	critically	evaluate	the	technologies	that	they	engage	withevery	day,	the	case	for	digital	sociology	has	never	been	stronger.	Moreover,	particularly	at	a	time	when	so	muchduff	sociology	(such	as	‘taboo	busting’	race	pseudoscience)	is	in	circulation,	public	interest	in	digital	technologyoffers	further	opportunities	to	show	what	rigorous,	cutting-edge	sociology	is	capable	of	contributing	to	contemporarypublic	discourse.Besides	digest	and	distribute	this	book,	what	can	those	of	us	who	are	convinced	digital	sociology	has	value	dowithin	the	academy	to	institute	digital	sociology?	It’s	worth	noting	that	most	of	the	digital	sociologists	cited	in	thisbook	who	are	pushing	the	boundaries	of	sociology	(including	Noortje	Marres,	Susan	Halford,	Helen	Kennedy,	KateOrton-Johnson,	Karen	Gregory,	Jessie	Daniels,	Tara	Stamm	and	Tressie	McMillan	Cottom)	are	women	who	aredoing	the	work	behind	the	scenes.	They	are	often	sacrificing	research	time,	taking	on	extra	responsibilities	andfighting	institutional	inertia	to	develop	digital	sociology	courses,	form	research	clusters	and	put	on	events.	If	digitalsociology	is	going	to	succeed,	they	need	everyone’s	support.This	review	originally	appeared	at	the	LSE	Review	of	Books.Image	One	Credit:	Image	by	Gerd	Altmann	from	Pixabay.Image	Two	Credit:	Image	by	Gerd	Altmann	from	Pixabay.Please	read	our	comments	policy	before	commenting.Note:	This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	authors,	and	not	the	position	of	USAPP–	American	Politics	and	Policy,	norof	the	London	School	of	Economics.Shortened	URL	for	this	post:	https://bit.ly/3hOWINdAbout	the	reviewerHuw	Davies	–	University	of	EdinburghDr	Huw	Davies	is	a	lecturer	in	Digital	Education	(specialising	in	data	and	society)	at	the	University	of	Edinburgh,	aResearch	Associate	at	the	Oxford	Internet	Institute,	and	co-convenor	of	the	BSA’s	Digital	Sociology	study	group(@BSADigitalSoc).USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 5 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-06-22Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/22/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/

Book review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn

Book	Review:	What	is	Digital	Sociology?	by	NeilSelwynIn	What	is	Digital	Sociology?,	Neil	Selwyn	offers	a	new	overview	of	digital	sociology,	advocating	for	itsmainstream	acceptance	as	a	valuable	expansion	of	sociological	inquiry,	while	dispelling	the	misconception	that	it	isa	entirely	new	or	radically	different	form	of	sociology.	This	is	an	excellent	introduction	to	digital	sociology,recommends	Huw	Davies,	that	will	be	particularly	helpful	for	students	and	any	sociologist	curious	about	the	field’sscope	and	purpose.This	review	originally	appeared	on	LSE	Review	of	Books.	If	you	would	like	to	contribute	to	the	series,	pleasecontact	the	managing	editor	of	LSE	Review	of	Books,	Dr	Rosemary	Deller,	at	lsereviewofbooks@lse.ac.ukWhat	is	Digital	Sociology?	Neil	Selwyn.	Polity.	2019.Sometimes	it’s	useful	to	reflect	on	just	how	profoundly	digital	technology	has	changedsociety.	Recently,	while	having	a	clear	out,	I	found	my	‘Weetabix	Book	of	Facts’.	WhileI	was	growing	up	during	the	1980s	in	the	valleys	of	South	Wales,	this	was	a	referencebook	for	me	to	find	out	about	history,	science	and	nature.	Although	many	of	theconstituent	technologies	existed	back	then,	having	all	the	world’s	knowledge	availableto	me	in	digitised	books	and	articles,	podcasts,	videos	and	encyclopaedias	in	aninstant,	through	a	handset	that	was	communicating	with	satellites,	was	still	within	therealm	of	science	fiction.	In	my	lifetime,	how	we	wage	war,	how	we	do	healthcare	andnegotiate	pandemics,	how	we	shop,	form	and	conduct	relationships,	co-habit	asfamilies,	entertain	ourselves,	learn,	consume	and	interpret	news,	participate	in	politicsand	activism,	and	transmit	hate	speech,	have	all	been	transformed	by	digitaltechnology.	Data	about	our	prejudices,	our	weaknesses,	passions	and	identities	arecommodified,	processed,	exploited	and	fed	back	to	us	like	a	virtual	soylent	green	sothat	modern	robber	barons	can	accumulate	wealth	and	power	beyond	the	reach	ofnation	states.	Depending	on	our	relative	position	within	hierarchies	of	wealth	andpower,	digital	technology	can	give	us	agency	and	take	it	away.Yet,	by	many	measures	the	sociological	study	of	digital	technology	is	not	part	of	mainstream	sociology.	PeteFussey	and	Silke	Roth	have	created	a	special	issue	of	Sociology	on	digital	sociology.	However,	since	2008	theBritish	Sociological	Association’s	flagship	journal	has	published	only	six	articles	at	the	time	of	writing	that	use	digitalas	a	keyword	according	to	its	search	engine.	Why	isn’t	digital	sociology	more	established	within	and	beyondsociology?In	What	is	Digital	Sociology?,	Neil	Selwyn	argues	an	‘increasingly	blurred	distinction	between	straight-aheadsociological	work	and	the	mass	of	cognate	work’	across	other	disciplines	(vii)	is	partly	responsible:	digital	sociologyis	alive	and	well;	it’s	just	often	being	done	elsewhere,	outside	of	mainstream	sociology.	In	contrast	to	Sociology,from	2008,	the	journal	New	Media	and	Society	has	published	314	articles	that	mention	‘sociology’	in	its	keywords.Many	of	the	researchers	that	one	of	my	fellow	digital	sociology	study	conveners,	Chris	Till,	has	interviewed	forhis	digital	sociology	podcast	are	doing	digital	sociology	but	don’t	call	themselves	sociologists.Selwyn	also	implies	digital	sociology	is	not	mainstream	because	not	enough	people	know	what	digital	sociology	is.Many	of	those	who	have	heard	of	digital	sociology	believe	we	don’t	need	a	faddish	new	form	of	‘sociology-lite’.	Andsociologists	are	sometimes	reluctant	to	exit	their	‘comfort	zones’	(42)	to	embrace	innovation.In	this	excellent	introduction	to	digital	sociology,	particularly	for	undergraduate	and	postgraduate	students	and	anysociologist	curious	about	the	field’s	scope	and	purpose,	Selwyn	advocates	for	digital	sociology’s	mainstreamacceptance	but	he	‘dispels	any	misconception	of	digital	sociology	being	a	new,	superior	or	radically	different	form	ofsociology’.	He	doesn’t	call	for	digital	sociology	to	‘usurp	or	demean	other	areas	of	sociological	work’,	but	instead	to‘augment	and	expand	sociological	inquiry’	(112).Impact of Social Sciences Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 1 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-07-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/07/05/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/		Chapter	One,	‘Promises	and	Precedents’,	begins	by	building	the	book’s	case	for	this	new	field	that	assesses	thesociological	impact	of	digital	technology.	Selwyn	pre-empts	critics	who	may	argue	digital	sociology	is	an	inferiorform	of	‘sociology-lite’	by	illustrating	how	technology	and	its	effects	have	always	been	a	concern	for	classicalsociologists	such	as	Karl	Marx,	Auguste	Comte,	Max	Weber	and	Thorstein	Veblen.	They	showed	that	technologyand	our	social	and	political	lives	are	indivisible	(which,	incidentally,	makes	me	wonder	why,	after	all	these	years,tech	determinism	is	still	a	thing!).	He	then	introduces	some	less	familiar,	twentieth-century	sociologists	oftechnology,	such	as	William	Fielding	Ogburn,	Lewis	Mumford	and	the	‘insightful	but	bleak’	(9)	Jacques	Ellul.	Weneed	a	new	form	of	sociology	because	‘the	current	wave	of	digital	technologies	is	quantitatively	and	qualitativelydistinct	from	the	technological	conditions’	(19):however	prescient	they	might	have	been,	Marx,	Ellul	and	others	were	not	contemplating	AI	or	theInternet	of	Things	in	their	argument	(19).Next,	we	are	offered	a	canter	through	STS	including	Judy	Wajcman,	Donna	Haraway	and	Sadie	Plant.	Digitalsociology’s	novelty	and	interpretive	flexibility	can	be	its	strength,	allowing	its	exponents	to	get	down	to	the	microlevel	more	than	their	forebearers:	‘digital	sociology	can	also	be	more	introspective	and	intimate	than	previoussociological	accounts	of	technology’	(19).	Equipped	with	such	expertise,	digital	sociologists	can	make	a	‘tangiblecontribution	to	building	(or	more	specifically	coding)	the	future	along	different	lines’	(20).	With	their	deep	technicalknowledge,	digital	sociologists	can	interrogate	and	change	for	the	better	the	‘coded	architectures	of	software,platforms	and	systems	and	the	programmed	nature	of	what	digital	technologies	seem	to	“do”	of	their	own	accord’(19).Impact of Social Sciences Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 2 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-07-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/07/05/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/Chapter	Two,	‘Digital	Sociology:	Central	Concerns,	Concepts	and	Questions’,	is	about	‘reframing	the	core	technicalfeatures	of	contemporary	technologies	into	sociological	concerns’	by	‘reusing	and	reconfiguring	fundamentalquestions	and	concepts	from	the	past	100	years	of	sociological	thinking’	and	‘looking	toward	new	forms	of	hybridtheory	emerging	from	conflations	of	philosophy,	computational	sciences,	design,	politics,	urban	geography	andother	sources	of	critical	thinking’	(22).	Here,	Selwyn	answers	the	contention	that	the	more	digitised	a	societybecomes,	the	more	things	that	can	be	rendered	as	0s	and	1s,	and	the	more	we	take	the	tech	for	granted,	the	lesswe	need	a	specialist	field	of	sociology	to	study	digital	technology:	‘retaining	the	prefix	of	digital	reflects	acommitment	to	continuing	to	notice	what	has	now	largely	become	invisible’	(23).	‘Instead	contemporary	society	isbetter	understood	as	an	entanglement	of	humanity,	materiality	and	digitality’	(24).	The	chapter	goes	on	to	cite	manysociologists	who	should	be	familiar	to	followers	of	@BSADigitalSoc	to	make	sociological	sense	of	‘networks’,‘platforms’,	‘data’,	‘algorithms	and	automation’.This	chapter’s	section	on	‘the	(re)use	of	social	theory	in	digital	sociology’	explores	digital	Marxist	theory,	platformcapitalism	and	digital	labour	as	well	as	digital	sources	of	resistance.	Selwyn	assesses	the	relevance	of	‘pre-digital’theorists	including	Michel	Foucault,	Gilles	Deleuze,	Erving	Goffman	and	Pierre	Bourdieu.	He	then	argues:the	best	digital	theory-building	of	the	past	decade	stems	from	social	and	computational	origins.	As	such,it	is	increasingly	apparent	that	digital	sociologists	need	to	develop	a	computational	as	well	as	asociological	imagination	(42).This	includes	engaging	with	thinkers	such	as	McKenzie	Wark,	Ian	Bogost	and	Geert	Lovink	who	come	from	‘gamer,hacker	and	hacktivist	backgrounds’	(42).	And	an	‘avant	garde’	of	theorists	including	Benjamin	Bratton,	AlexanderGalloway	and	Wendy	Chun,	whose	work	‘is	already	proving	tremendously	generative	for	digital	sociologists	to	drawupon’	(44).	Selwyn	concludes:‘simply	adding	Foucault	to	Facebook	is	not	a	sufficient	intellectual	response	to	the	complexmachinations	of	the	digital	age’	(44).Chapter	Three	describes	two	examples	of	digital	sociology	inquiry	–	the	areas	of	digital	labour	and	digital	race.	Thischapter	includes	sections	on	the	digitisation	of	traditional	work,	new	forms	of	distributed,	discrete	work	and	socialmedia	as	sites	of	‘free	labor’	(53).	The	racialised	nature	of	digital	media	is	explored	through	a	number	of	differentstrands,	including	work	that	addresses	‘the	dynamics	of	online	interactions’	(60),	how	‘applications	and	platformsare	configured	in	ways	that	prompt	and	perpetuate	racialized	dynamics’	(61),	race	and	the	digital	formation	ofcollective	identity.	Here,	Selwyn	cites	many	of	the	leading	lights	on	digital	race	such	as	André	Brock,	TressieMcMillan	Cottom,	Jessie	Daniels,	Safiya	Umoja	Noble	and,	from	the	UK,	Sanjay	Sharma,	who	all	discuss	how	thedominant	platforms	perpetuate	and	monetise	racism.	I	would	urge	readers	to	also	look	up	Ruha	Benjamin’s	work.Since	Selwyn	writes	that	‘Chapter	3’s	indicative	discussions	of	digital	race	and	digital	labour	are	intended	to	inspirereaders	to	delve	into	other	literatures	on	equally	significant	topics’,	on	gender,	I	would	recommend,	for	example,these	books	on	Data	Feminism	and	the	history	of	women	in	UK	computing.Chapter	Four,	‘Digital	Methods	and	Methodology’,	inevitably	includes	a	dialogue	with	Mike	Savage	and	RogerBurrows	(2007),	deals	with	big	data	and	the	computational	social	sciences,	how	‘commercial	sociology’	(71)	isinnovating	its	methods,	describes	the	affordances	and	limitations	of	large-scale	social	media	data	from	platformssuch	as	Twitter	and	cites	‘topic	modelling’	as	one	particular	area	of	interest	(75).	Here	Selwyn	also	discusses	‘thickdata’,	‘the	digital	ethnographic	turn’	(78)	and	‘ethnographies	of	online	communities’	(80).	The	next	section	oncoding,	programming	and	software	development	addresses	the	‘burgeoning	trend	of	research	based	around	thedesign,	development	and	implementation	of	software	and	coded	artifacts’	(82).	These	are	‘driving	impetus	for	digitalsociology	[…]	to	engage	in	design	and	implementation	of	software	that	is	likely	to	push	boundaries	and	test	thelimits	of	coded	environments’	(83),	and	to	‘act	to	repurpose	digital	tools	away	from	(and	even	against)	commerciallogics	and	imperatives	of	dominant	platforms’	(87).	While	these	discrete	chapters	help	make	sense	of	digitalsociology,	the	themes	they	address	are	often	indivisible.	For	example,	an	awful	lot	of	digital	sociology’s	‘cognatework’,	particularly	by	its	more	positivist	and	computational	cousins,	has	a	problem	that	Gurminder	Bhambracalls	methodological	whiteness.	Impact of Social Sciences Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 3 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-07-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/07/05/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/	The	final	chapter	‘reflects	on	the	craft,	scholarship	and	practice	of	digital	sociology’	(92).	‘Unlike	their	colleagues	insome	other	areas	of	sociology’,	digital	sociologists,	we	are	told,	‘are	less	concerned’	with	‘sociological	clique’	or	theinstitution	where	they	‘happen	to	be	employed’	(93).	And,	‘many	digital	sociologists	are	happy	to	spend	time	riffingideas	on	Twitter	and	later	rounding	these	up	to	a	few	‘‘blog-worthy’’	paragraphs’	(96).	Selwyn	says	there	is	‘much	toadmire’	in	such	practices,	but	the	digital	scholar	is	sometimes	‘tone-deaf	to	the	politics	of	contemporary	academicwork’,	including	‘performativity	and	affect’	and	‘issues	that	digital	sociologists	are	well	used	to	discussing	withregard	to	other	people’s	digital	media	use’	(105).It’s	true	that	the	ideal	digital	scholar	is	the	neoliberal	university’s	teacher’s	pet:	the	winner	in	the	Altmetric	Olympics.But,	during	my	seven	years	of	involvement	in	@BSADigitalSoc,	I	haven’t	encountered	any	digital	sociologists	whoaren’t	acutely	and	reflexively	aware	that	there	‘is	the	growing	co-opting	of	these	forms	of	digital	scholarship	intoforms	of	performativity,	accountability	and	measurement-based	management	that	now	pervade	contemporaryacademia’	(106).	There	are	more	salient	examples	of	academics	who	have	failed	this	reflexivity	test	embodied	inparodies	such	as	@ProfBritPol_PhD.Selwyn	also	argues	that	‘despite	being	well	aware	of	the	phenomenon,	digital	sociologists	are	not	immune	to	thesocial	media	phenomenon	of	‘‘filter	bubbles’”	(109).	While	there	may	be	some	truth	in	this,	to	get	a	broaderperspective	and	for	research	purposes	many	digital	sociologists,	including	myself,	deliberately	venture	outside	ourfilter	bubbles	to	observe	how	people	with	different	politics,	epistemologies	and	world	views	think	and	behave.	I	alsofeel	I’m	one	of	the	lucky	ones	who	experiences	Twitter	as	more	of	‘a	supportive	community’	than	‘self-congratulatory,	smug	clique’	(109).Impact of Social Sciences Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 4 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-07-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/07/05/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/However,	aside	from	these	quibbles,	if	after	reading	this	book	you	are	still	unconvinced	of	digital	sociology’s	value,you	probably	never	will	be.	The	digital	turn	engages	every	level	of	sociological	analysis:	macro,	meso	and	micro.Therefore,	‘digital	sociologists	should	feel	at	ease	in	switching	between	continental	and	computational	philosophyand	in	harboring	interests	in	Marx	and	machine	learning’	(44).	Given	that	‘digital	technology	is	entwined	with	issuesof	race,	sexuality,	disability	and	intersections	therein’	(19),	there	is	an	opportunity	for	sociology	to	draw	on	its	richtraditions	and	claim	this	space,	make	a	virtue	of	digital	sociology’s	ability	to	access	a	smorgasbord	of	methods	andtheories	and	become	the	‘go-to’	discipline	for	the	study	of	digital	technology’s	effects	on	society	(and	vice	versa).Borrowing	a	metaphor	from	software	engineering	(a	‘full	stack	developer’	can	programme	the	front	end	and	backend	of	computing	systems),	by	addressing	macro,	meso	and	micro	layers	of	socio-technical	systems	–	from	thealgorithms	they	execute	to	their	political	economy	to	their	socio-emotional	consequences	–	digital	sociology,	as	adiscipline,	offers	a	full	stack	critique	of	the	digitised	society.Given	there	are	so	few	opportunities	for	young	people	to	critically	evaluate	the	technologies	that	they	engage	withevery	day,	the	case	for	digital	sociology	has	never	been	stronger.	Moreover,	particularly	at	a	time	when	so	muchduff	sociology	(such	as	‘taboo	busting’	race	pseudoscience)	is	in	circulation,	public	interest	in	digital	technologyoffers	further	opportunities	to	show	what	rigorous,	cutting-edge	sociology	is	capable	of	contributing	to	contemporarypublic	discourse.Besides	digest	and	distribute	this	book,	what	can	those	of	us	who	are	convinced	digital	sociology	has	value	dowithin	the	academy	to	institute	digital	sociology?	It’s	worth	noting	that	most	of	the	digital	sociologists	cited	in	thisbook	who	are	pushing	the	boundaries	of	sociology	(including	Noortje	Marres,	Susan	Halford,	Helen	Kennedy,	KateOrton-Johnson,	Karen	Gregory,	Jessie	Daniels,	Tara	Stamm	and	Tressie	McMillan	Cottom)	are	women	who	aredoing	the	work	behind	the	scenes.	They	are	often	sacrificing	research	time,	taking	on	extra	responsibilities	andfighting	institutional	inertia	to	develop	digital	sociology	courses,	form	research	clusters	and	put	on	events.	If	digitalsociology	is	going	to	succeed,	they	need	everyone’s	support.	Note:	This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	the	LSE	Impact	Blog,	nor	of	the	LondonSchool	of	Economics.	Please	review	our	comments	policy	if	you	have	any	concerns	on	posting	a	comment	below.Image	credit:	Lucrezia	Carnelos	&	Stella	Jacob	via	Unsplash.Impact of Social Sciences Blog: Book Review: What is Digital Sociology? by Neil Selwyn Page 5 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-07-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/07/05/book-review-what-is-digital-sociology-by-neil-selwyn/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/105461/1/lsereviewofbooks_2020_06_15_book_review_what_is_digital_sociology_by.pdf

Book review: What is digital sociology? by Neil Selwyn

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online

LSE Research Online

LSE Research Online