From the Publisher: 
A Question of Identity 
Life on the Screen is a fascinating and wide-ranging investigation of the impact of computers and networking on society, peoples' perceptions of themselves, and the individual's relationship to machines. Sherry Turkle, a Professor of the Sociology of Science at MIT and a licensed psychologist, uses Internet MUDs (multi-user domains, or in older gaming parlance multi-user dungeons) as a launching pad for explorations of software design, user interfaces, simulation, artificial intelligence, artificial life, agents, "bots," virtual reality, and "the on-line way of life." 
Turkle's discussion of postmodernism is particularly enlightening. She shows how postmodern concepts in art, architecture, and ethics are related to concrete topics much closer to home, for example AI research (Minsky's "Society of Mind") and even MUDs (exemplified by students with X-window terminals who are doing homework in one window and simultaneously playing out several different roles in the same MUD in other windows). Those of you who have (like me) been turned off by the shallow, pretentious, meaningless paintings and sculptures that litter our museums of modern art may have a different perspective after hearing what Turkle has to say. 
This is a psychoanalytical book, not a technical one. However, software developers and engineers will find it highly accessible because of the depth of the author's technical understanding and credibility. Unlike most other authors in this genre, Turkle does not constantly jar the technically-literate reader with blatant errors or bogus assertions about how things work. Although I personally don't have time or patience for MUDs,view most of AI as snake-oil, and abhor postmodern architecture, I thought the time spent reading this book was an extremely good investment.

스크린 위의 삶 = Life on the screen : identity in the age of the internet

Following the 2016 U.S. presidential election, many have expressed concern about the effects of false stories (“fake news”), circulated largely through social media. We discuss the economics of fake news and present new data on its consumption prior to the election. Drawing on web browsing data, archives of fact-checking websites, and results from a new online survey, we find: (i) social media was an important but not dominant source of election news, with 14 percent of Americans calling social media their “most important” source; (ii) of the known false news stories that appeared in the three months before the election, those favoring Trump were shared a total of 30 million times on Facebook, while those favoring Clinton were shared 8 million times; (iii) the average American adult saw on the order of one or perhaps several fake news stories in the months around the election, with just over half of those who recalled seeing them believing them; and (iv) people are much more likely to believe stories that favor their preferred candidate, especially if they have ideologically segregated social media networks.

/pdf/social-media-and-fake-news-in-the-2016-election-1m4ttkb5mo.pdf

Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election

The article reviews the book "Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other," by Sherry Turkle.

Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other.

What is Twitter

Metadata and data have become a regular currency for citizens to pay for their communication services and security—a trade-off that has nestled into the comfort zone of most people. This article deconstructs the ideological grounds of datafication. Datafication is rooted in problematic ontological and epistemological claims. As part of a larger social media logic, it shows characteristics of a widespread secular belief. Dataism, as this conviction is called, is so successful because masses of people — naively or unwittingly — trust their personal information to corporate platforms. The notion of trust becomes more problematic because people’s faith is extended to other public institutions (e.g. academic research and law enforcement) that handle their (meta)data. The interlocking of government, business, and academia in the adaptation of this ideology makes us want to look more critically at the entire ecosystem of connective media.

/pdf/datafication-dataism-and-dataveillance-big-data-between-ur4oh7cwx7.pdf

Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology

The practice of using a “second screen” while following a television program is quickly becoming a widespread phenomenon. When the secondary device is used for comments about programs, most discussions take place on popular social media such as Facebook and Twitter. Previous research pointed out the value of these conversations in understanding the behavior of “networked publics.” Building upon this background, this article presents the first study on a complete dataset of tweets (2,489,669) that span an entire season of a TV genre (1,076 episodes of talk shows). A content analysis of the tweets created during the season's most engaging moments indicates a relationship between typology of broadcasted scenes, style of comments, and the way participation (audience and political) is played.

Second Screen and Participation: A Content Analysis on a Full Season Dataset of Tweets

A growing amount of content is published worldwide every day by millions of social media users. Most of this content is public, permanent, and searchable. At the same time, the number of studies proposing different techniques and methodologies to exploit this content as data for researchers in different disciplines is also growing. This article presents an up-to-date literature review that frames available studies using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as data sources, in the perspective of traditional approaches for social scientists: ethnographical, statistical, and computational. The aim is to offer an overview of strengths and weaknesses of different approaches in the context of the possibilities offered by the different platforms.

The Open Laboratory: Limits and Possibilities of Using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as a Research Data Source

Over the last few years, a proliferation of attempts to define, understand and fight the spread of problematic information in contemporary media ecosystems emerged. Most of these attempts focus on ...

It takes a village to manipulate the media: coordinated link sharing behavior during 2018 and 2019 Italian elections

Alarmed by the oversimplifications related to the ‘fake news’ buzzword, researchers have started to unpack the concept, defining diverse types and forms of misleading news. Most of the existing wor...

‘Fake news’ is the invention of a liar: How false information circulates within the hybrid news system:

Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out: Kids Living and Learning with New Media (John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning)

Fabio Giglietto

Papers

Second Screen and Participation: A Content Analysis on a Full Season Dataset of Tweets

The Open Laboratory: Limits and Possibilities of Using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as a Research Data Source

It takes a village to manipulate the media: coordinated link sharing behavior during 2018 and 2019 Italian elections

‘Fake news’ is the invention of a liar: How false information circulates within the hybrid news system:

Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out: Kids Living and Learning with New Media (John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning)