Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-kpmwg Total loading time: 0.345 Render date: 2021-12-01T07:45:56.444Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Antisocial media in archaeology?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2014

Abstract

An increasing number of individual archaeologists, archaeological organizations and institutions are using social media platforms for professional discussion and networking, research, public outreach and community archaeology. Proponents of social media have particularly pointed towards their potential for transforming the means of networking and communication in archaeology, and challenging traditional disciplinary expertise as archaeologists engage with more diverse and active online publics. This article provides a theoretically informed critical discussion, pointing towards the complex barriers to equal Internet access and usage, which challenge the ability of archaeologists to use social media as a tool to democratize the discipline. It concludes that, in many cases, social media appear to have reinforced archaeological authority at the expense of genuinely decentred engagement or collaboration. The article acts as a challenge to encourage further debate and empirically informed research in this emerging area of archaeological practice.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adair, B., Filene, B. and Koloski, L. (eds), 2011: Letting go? Sharing historical authority in a user-generated world, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
AP. Online journal in archaeology, n.d, AP Journal blog, available at http://arqueologiapublica.blogspot.co.uk, accessed 26 May 2014.Google Scholar
Baltussen, L.B., Brinkerink, M., Zeinstra, M., Oomen, J. and Timmermans, N., 2013: Open cultural data. Opening GLAM data bottom-up. Paper presented at the Museums and the Web conference, Portland, OR, 17–20 April 2013.Google Scholar
Biehl, P., 2004: Communicating archaeology via multimedia. Multimedia archaeology in Goseck, Germany. Paper presented at the Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology conference, Prato, 13–17 April 2004.Google Scholar
Boast, R., 2011: Neocolonial collaboration. Museums as contact zone revisited, Museum anthropology 34 (1), 5670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boast, R., and Enote, J., 2013: Virtual repatriation. It is neither virtual nor repatriation, in Biehl, P.F., and Prescott, C. (eds), Heritage in the context of globalization. Europe and the Americas, New York, 103–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonacchi, C. (ed.), 2012a: Archaeologists and digital communication. Towards strategies of public engagement, London.Google Scholar
Bonacchi, C., 2012b: Introduction, in Bonacchi, C. (ed.), Archaeologists and digital communication. Towards strategies of public engagement, London, xi–xix.Google Scholar
Bowker, G.C., and Star, S.L., 1999: Sorting things out. Classification and its consequences, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Boyd, D., Golder, S. and Totan, G., 2010: Tweet, tweet, retweet. Conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter. Paper presented at the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, 5–8 January 2010.Google Scholar
Brabham, D.C., 2013: Crowdsourcing, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Brock, T., 2013: ‘All of us would walk together’. Digital cultural heritage and the African American past at Historic St Mary's City, Maryland. Paper presented at Digital Humanities 2013, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 16–19 July 2013.Google Scholar
Brown, D., and Nicholas, G., 2012: Protecting indigenous cultural property in the age of digital democracy. Institutional and communal response to Canadian First Nations and Māori heritage concerns, Journal of material culture 17 (3), 307–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruns, A., 2008: Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and beyond. From production to produsage, New York.Google Scholar
Cairns, S., 2013: Mutualizing museum knowledge. Folksonomies and the changing shape of expertise, Curator 56 (1), 107–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, F., 2008: Objected-oriented democracies. Conceptualising museum collections in networks, Museum management and curatorship 23 (3), 229–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caraher, W.R., 2008: Archaeology and the archaeology of blogging. Archaeology magazine, available at http://archive.archaeology.org/online/features/blogs, accessed 23 June 2013.Google Scholar
Christen, K., 2011: Opening archives. Respectful repatriation, American archivist 74, 185210.Google Scholar
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, C., and Ferguson, T.J. (eds.), 2008: Collaboration in archaeological practice. Engaging descendant communities, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Conkey, M.W., 2005: Dwelling at the margins, action at the intersection? Feminist and Indigenous archaeologies, Archaeologies 1 (1), 959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correa, T., 2010: The participation divide among ‘online experts’. Experience, skills and psychological factors as predictors of college students’ web content creation, Journal of computer-mediated communication 16 (1), 7192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, K., 2009: Following you. Disciplines of listening in social media, Continuum 23 (4), 525–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, J., 2013: From tweet to blog post to peer-reviewed article. How to be a scholar now. LSE impact of social sciences, available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/09/25/how-to-be-a-scholar-daniels, accessed 27 September 2013.Google Scholar
Day of Archaeology, n.d., Day of Archaeology. Discover the past. Find out what archaeologists really do, available at www.dayofarchaeology.com, accessed 11 July 2013.Google Scholar
Day of Digital Humanities, n.d., About Day of DH, available at http://dayofdh 2013.matrix.msu.edu/about-day-of-dh, accessed 11 July 2013.Google Scholar
Dicks, B. (ed.), 2012: Digital qualitative research methods, Vol. 1., Mapping the field of digital qualitative research, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DigVentures, n.d., About us, available at http://digventures.com/about-us, accessed 11 July 2013.Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P., and Gilson, C., 2012: Five minutes with Patrick Dunleavy and Chris Gilson. ‘Blogging is quite simply, one of the most important things that an academic should be doing right now’. LSE impact of social sciences, available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/02/24/five-minutes-patrick-dunleavy-chris-gilson, accessed 27 September 2013.Google Scholar
Dunn, S., and Hedges, M.. 2012, Crowd-sourcing scoping study. Engaging the crowd with humanities research. Report prepared for AHRC Connected Communities, available at http://stuartdunn.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/crowdsourcing-connected-communities.pdf, accessed 13 June 2014.Google Scholar
Dutton, W.H., and Blank, G., 2013: Cultures of the Internet. The Internet in Britain. Report prepared for Oxford Internet Survey, available at http://oxis.oii.ox.ac.uk/sites/oxis.oii.ox.ac.uk/files/content/files/publications/OxIS_2013.pdf, accessed 3 October 2013.Google Scholar
Fenner, M., 2012: Do more tweets mean higher citations? If so, Twitter can lead us to the ‘personalised journal’. Pinpointing more research that is relevant to your interests, LSE impact of social sciences, available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/02/09/more-tweets-more-citations, accessed 27 September 2013.Google Scholar
Florida Public Archaeology Network, n.d., Florida Public Archaeology Network – Home, available at www.flpublicarchaeology.org, accessed 24 October 2013.Google Scholar
Fuchs, C., 2014: Digital labour and Karl Marx, Abingdon.Google Scholar
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Puig-i-Abril, E. and Rojas, H., 2009: Weblogs, traditional sources online and political participation. An assessment of how the Internet is changing the political environment, New media & society 11 (4), 553–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gura, T., 2013: Amateur experts, Nature 496, 259–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hargittai, E., 2002: Second-level digital divide. Differences in people's online skills, First Monday 7 (4), available at http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/942/864, accessed 8 July 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennessy, K., Wallace, R. and Jakobsen, N., 2012: Virtual repatriation and the application programming interface. From the Smithsonian Institution's MacFarlane Collection to ‘Inuvialuit Living History’. Paper presented at the Museums and the Web conference, San Diego, 11–14 April 2012.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1999: The archaeological process. An introduction, Oxford.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C., 2004: The future of electronic scholarship. Internet archaeology 15, available at http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.15.11, accessed 26 May 2014.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C., 2009: A comment on hybrid fields and academic gate-keeping, Public archaeology 8 (2–3), 310–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, H., 2006: Convergence culture. Where old and new media collide, New York.Google Scholar
Joyce, R.A., and Tringham, R.E., 2007: Feminist adventures in hypertext, Journal of archaeological method and theory 14, 328–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, R., and Kellner, D., 2004: New media and Internet activism. From the ‘Battle of Seattle’ to blogging, New media & society 6 (1), 8795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kansa, E.C., 2012: Openness and archaeology's information ecosystem, World archaeology 44 (4), 498520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kansa, E.C., Kansa, S.W. and Goldstein, L., 2013: On ethics, sustainability, and open access in archaeology, SAA archaeological record 13 (4), 1522.Google Scholar
Kansa, E.C., Kansa, S.W. and Watrall, E. (eds), 2011: Archaeology 2.0. New approaches to communication and collaboration, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Kansa, S.W., and Deblauwe, F., 2011: User-generated content in zooarchaeology. Exploring the ‘middle space’ of scholarly communication, in Kansa, E.C., Kansa, S.W. and Watrall, E. (eds), Archaeology 2.0. New approaches to communication and collaboration, Los Angeles, 185206.Google Scholar
Kelly, L., and Russo, A.. 2010, From communities of practice to value networks. Engaging museums in Web 2.0, in Cameron, F. and Kelly, L. (eds), Hot topics, public culture, museums, Newcastle upon Tyne, 281–98.Google Scholar
Lake, M., 2012: Open archaeology, World archaeology 44 (4), 471–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Limp, W.F., 2011: Web 2.0 and beyond, or on the Web, nobody knows you’re an archaeologist, in Kansa, E.C., Kansa, S.W. and Watrall, E. (eds), Archaeology 2.0. New approaches to communication and collaboration, Los Angeles, 265–80.Google Scholar
Livingstone, S., and Helsper, E., 2007: Gradiations in digital inclusion. Children, young people and the digital divide, New media & society 9 (4), 671–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, J., 2014: Building a ‘community of archaeologists’ and the value of social media, Can you dig it?, available at http://c-u-d-i.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/building-community-of-archaeologists.html, accessed 24 May 2014.Google Scholar
McDavid, C., 2004: Towards a more democratic archaeology? The Internet and public archaeological practice, in Merriman, N. (ed.), Public archaeology, London, 159–87.Google Scholar
Mollett, A., Moran, D. and Dunleavy, P., 2011: Using Twitter in university research, teaching and impact activities. Report prepared for LSE Public Policy Group, available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/files/2011/11/Published-Twitter_Guide_Sept_2011.pdf, accessed 27 September 2013.Google Scholar
Morgan, C., and Eve, S., 2012: DIY and digital archaeology. What are you doing to participate? World archaeology 44 (4), 521–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neylon, C., 2013: Open is a state of mind that actively encourages the opportunity for unexpected contributions to scholarly work, LSE impact of social sciences, available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/07/11/open-is-a-state-of-mind, accessed 27 September 2013.Google Scholar
Nicholas, G.P., 2010: Introduction, in Nicholas, G.P. (ed.), Being and becoming Indigenous archaeologists, Walnut Creek, 918.Google Scholar
Nicholas, G.P., Roberts, A., Schaepe, D.M., Watkins, J., Leader-Elliot, L. and Rowley, S., 2011: A consideration of theory, principles and practice in collaborative archaeology, Archaeological review from Cambridge 26 (2), 1130.Google Scholar
Noelle-Nuemann, E., 1993: The spiral of silence. Public opinion – our social skin, 2nd edn, Chicago.Google Scholar
ONS (Office for National Statistics), 2012: Internet access. Households and individuals, 2012 part 1. Report prepared for Office for National Statistics, available at www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_275775.pdf, accessed 26 August 2012.Google Scholar
ONS (Office for National Statistics), 2013: Internet access. Households and individuals, 2012 part 2. Report prepared for Office for National Statistics, available at www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_301822.pdf, accessed 1 March 2013.Google Scholar
O’Reilly, T., 2005: What is Web 2.0. Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software, available at http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html, accessed 16 April 2011.Google Scholar
Owens, T., 2013: Digital cultural heritage and the crowd, Curator 56 (1), 121–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, L.B., 2013: The temple and the bazaar. Wikipedia as a platform for open authority in museums, Curator 56 (2), 219–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pisreflli, M., 2013: Using social networks to fundraise. Crowdfunding for the archaeologist, SAA archaeological record 13 (4), 3639.Google Scholar
Povinelli, E.A., 2011: The woman on the other side of the wall. Archiving the otherwise in postcolonial digital archives, Differences 22 (1), 146–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rheingold, H., 1994: The virtual community. Finding connection in a computerized world, London.Google Scholar
Richardson, L., 2013: A digital public archaeology?, Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 23 (1), 112.Google Scholar
Ridge, M., 2013: From tagging to theorizing. Deepening engagement with cultural heritage through crowdsourcing, Curator 56 (4), 435–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocks-Macqueen, D., 2013: #askacurator. Not pulling any punches, Doug's archaeology, available at http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/askacurator-not-pulling-any-punches, accessed 5 October 2013Google Scholar
Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Russell, B., Canty, N. and Watkinson, A., 2011: Social media use in the research workflow, Learned publishing 24, 183–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowley, S., Schaepe, D., Sparrow, L., Sanborn, A., Radermacher, U., Wallace, R., Jakobsen, N., Turner, H., Sadofsky, S. and Goffman, T., 2010: Building an on-line research community. The Reciprocal Research Network. Paper presented at the Museums and the Web conference, Denver, 13–17 April 2010.Google Scholar
Russo, A., Watkins, J. and Groundwater-Smith, S., 2009: The impact of social media on informal learning in museums, Educational media international 46 (2), 153–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanger, L.M., 2009: The fate of expertise after Wikipedia, Episteme 6 (1), 5273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, T., 2013: Introduction. Why does digital labor matter now?, in Scholz, T. (ed.), Digital labor. The Internet as playground and factory, Abingdon, 19.Google Scholar
Schreg, R., 2013: Archaeology, the public, and social media. Some new insights from Germany. Journal of community archaeology and heritage blog, available at http://journalcah.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/archaeology-public-and-social-media.html, accessed 5 July 2013.Google Scholar
Schreg, R., n.d., Archaeologik, available at http://archaeologik.blogspot.de, accessed 26 May 2014.Google Scholar
Selwyn, N., 2006: Digital division or digital decision? A study of non-users and low-users of computers, Poetics 34, 273–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirky, C., 2008: Here comes everybody. The power of organizing without organizations, London.Google Scholar
Smith, L., 2004: Archaeological theory and the politics of cultural heritage, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L., and Waterton, E., 2009: Heritage, communities and archaeology, London.Google Scholar
Srinivasan, R., Becvar, K.M., Boast, R. and Enote, J., 2010: Diverse knowledges and contact zones within the digital museum, Science, technology, & human values 35 (5), 735–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srinivasan, R., Boast, R., Furner, J. and Becvar, K.M., 2009: Digital museums and diverse cultural knowledges. Moving past the traditional catalog, The information society 25 (4), 265–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suber, P., 2012: Open access, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarPubMed
Surowiecki, J., 2005: The wisdom of crowds. Why the many are smarter than the few, London.Google Scholar
Terras, M., 2012: The impact of social media on the dissemination of research. Results of an experiment. Journal of digital humanities 1 (3), available at http://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-3/the-impact-of-social-media-on-the-dissemination-of-research-by-melissa-terras, accessed 10 July 2013.Google Scholar
Trant, J., 2009: Tagging, folksonomy and art museums. Results of steve.museum's research. Report for Archives and Museum Informatics, available at www.museumsandtheweb.com/files/trantSteveResearchReport2008.pdf, accessed 2 April 2011.Google Scholar
Van Deursen, A.J.A.M., and van Dijk, J.A.G.M., 2011: Internet skills and the digital divide, New media & society 13 (6), 893911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, J.A.G.M., 2009: One Europe, digitally divided, in Chadwick, A. and Howard, P.N. (eds), The Routledge handbook of Internet politics, Abingdon, 288304.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, J.A.G.M., 2012: The network society, 3rd edn, London.Google Scholar
Wadewitz, A., 2013: Wikipedia is pushing the boundaries of scholarly practice but the gender gap must be addressed, LSE impact of social sciences, available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/04/09/change-the-world-edit-wikipedia, accessed 27 September 2013.Google Scholar
White, P., and Selwyn, N., 2013: Moving on-line? An analysis of patterns of adult Internet use in the UK, 2002–2010, Information, communication & society 16 (1), 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WikiProject Archaeology, 2013: Wikipedia. WikiProject Archaeology, available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Archaeology, accessed 24 May 2013.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 2008: Legacies of collaboration. Transformative criticism in archaeology, paper presented at the American Anthropological Association conference, San Francisco, 21 November 2008.Google Scholar
Yates, D., n.d., Anonymous Swiss Collector, available at www.anonymousswisscollector.com, accessed 26 May 2014.Google Scholar
Yun, G.W., and Park, S.-Y., 2011: Selective posting. Willingness to post a message online, Journal of computer-mediated communication 16 (2), 201–27.Google Scholar
Zickuhr, K., and Smith, A., 2012: Digital differences. Report repaired for Pew Internet & American Life Project, available at http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP_Digital_differences_041312.pdf, accessed 30 September 2012.Google Scholar
16
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Antisocial media in archaeology?
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Antisocial media in archaeology?
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Antisocial media in archaeology?
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *