Skip to content
1981

Ethnographic Methods and Ethics for Online Cultures of Popular Music

image of Ethnographic Methods and Ethics for Online Cultures of Popular Music
  • By Raquel Campos Valverde
  • Source: The Intellect Handbook of Popular Music Methodologies , pp 311-325
  • Publication Date: June 2025
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1386/9781835951033_20
  • Language: English
  • Accessibility Summary:  EPUB 3 and pdf file included; compatible with devices and software which can read these formats. Adjustable font size, spacing, contrast, text justification, number of columns (ePUB only). Alternative text for images. Tagged with a logical reading order to assist screen readers. Navigation between in-text citations and reference list, and endnotes and endnote markers.

Scholars with expertise in specific traditions increasingly find that cultural practices are mediated by online communication tools. Research on musicians and creativity is also progressively focused on the savoir faire necessary to have an active presence on social media and to distribute musical outputs via streaming. In addition, the pandemic has forced many ethnographers and researchers of popular music to migrate their projects to online settings and conduct research remotely via social media and streaming platforms. Livestreamed performances are now commonplace too. Dance memes, and viral videos highlight the centrality of music cultures in the development of online social life. If music is increasingly distributed, consumed and experienced online, what does that mean for the study of popular music in its digital context? How can scholars address these technological developments? This chapter provides a quick guide to design and conduct mixed-methods digital ethnography for popular music and online musical cultures.

Keywords: Cultural Study of Music ; Digital Cultures ; Ethical research ; Ethnography ; Internet Studies ; Methodology ; Popular Music Studies

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abidin, C. and de Seta, G. (eds) (2020), ‘Private messages from the field: Confessions on digital ethnography and its discomforts’, Journal of Digital Social Research, Special Issue: ‘Doing Digital Ethnography: Messages from the Field’, 2:1, pp. 1–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Airoldi, M. (2018), ‘Ethnography and the digital fields of social media’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21:6, pp. 661–73.323
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Allington, D. , Dueck, B. and Jordanous, A. (2015), ‘Networks of value in electronic music: SoundCloud, London, and the importance of place’, Cultural Trends, 24:3, pp. 211–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Arditi, D. (2021), Streaming Culture: Subscription Platforms and the Unending Consumption of Culture, Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Ayers, M. (ed.) (2006), Cybersounds: Essays on Virtual Music Culture, New York: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bartlett, R. and Milligan, C. (2015), What Is Diary Method?, London: Bloomsbury Academic, https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472572578.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bartlett, R. and Milligan, C. (2021), Diary Method: Research Methods, rev. ed., New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Baym, N. K. (2018), Playing to the Crowd. Musicians, Audiences and the Intimate Work of Connection, New York: New York University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Boellstorff, T. , Nardi, B. , Pearce, C. and Taylor, T. L. (2012), Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bolger, N. , Davis, A. and Rafaeli, E. (2003), ‘Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived’, Annual Review of Psychology, 54:1, pp. 579–616.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bonini, T. and Gandini, A. (2019), ‘“First week is editorial, second week is algorithmic”: Platform gatekeepers and the platformization of music curation’, Social Media + Society, 5:4, https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119880006.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Born, G. (ed.) (2022), Music and Digital Media: A Planetary Anthropology, London: UCL Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Born, G. and Barry, A. (2018), ‘Music, mediation theories and actor-network theory’, Contemporary Music Review, 37:5&6, pp. 443–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Budka, P. (2020), ‘Digital and online ethnography: A selection of resources’, 19 March, http://www.philbu.net/blog/digital-and-online-ethnography-a-selection-of-resources/. Accessed 24 June 2022 .
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Burgess, J. and Green, J. (2009), YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture, Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Burgess, J. , Marwick, A. and Poell, T. (2017), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media, London: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Caliandro, A. (2018), ‘Digital methods for ethnography: Analytical concepts for ethnographers exploring social media environments’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography , 47:5, pp. 551–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Campos Valverde, R. (2022), ‘Online musicking for humanity: The role of imagined listening and the moral economies of music sharing on social media’, Popular Music, 41:2, pp. 194–215, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143022000034.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Carter, S. and Mankoff, J. (2005), ‘When participants do the capturing: The role of media in diary studies’, in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems [Online], 2 April 2005, Portland, OR: ACM, pp. 899–908, https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.1055098. Accessed 24 July 2024 .
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Cheng, W. (2012), ‘Role-playing toward a virtual musical democracy in The Lord of the Rings online’, Ethnomusicology, 56:1 (Winter), pp. 31–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Cirucci, A. M. and Pruchniewska, U. M. (2022), UX Research Methods for Media and Communication Studies: An Introduction to Contemporary Qualitative Methods, Oxon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Couldry, N. and Mejias, U. A. (2019), ‘Data Colonialism: Rethinking Big Data's Relation to the Contemporary Subject’, Television & New Media,, 20:4, pp. 336–349, https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Crawford, K. (2009), ‘Following you: Disciplines of listening in social media’, Continuum, 23:4, pp. 525–35, https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310903003270.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Duguay, S. and Gold-Apel, H. (2023), ‘Stumbling blocks and alternative paths: Reconsidering the walkthrough method for analyzing apps’, Social Media + Society, 9:1, https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231158822.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Durham, B. (2018), ‘Curating online sounds’, in M. Bull (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Sound Studies, Oxon and New York: Routledge, pp. 231–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Ess, C. and the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (2002), Ethical Decision-making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AOIR Ethics Working Committee, https://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf.
  27. franzke, a. , Bechmann, A. , Zimmer, M. , Ess, C. and the Association of Internet Researchers (2020), Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0, https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
  28. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), https://gdpr.eu. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
  29. Glatt, Z. (2022), ‘Influencer Industries and Creator Culture reading list’ (Crowdsourced document), revised June 2022, https://zoeglatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/INFLUENCER-INDUSTRIES-CREATOR-CULTURE-Collective-Reading-List-June-2022.pdf. Accessed 24 June 2022 .
  30. Glatt, Z. and Spector, B. (2022), ‘Digital Ethnography Collective reading list’ (Crowdsourced document), revised October 2022, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RaFQdQFdijQs6eQ_UlZRBuF30oD80uvisDyJXFjwuzw/edit#heading=h.wmsucdu7m3fo. Accessed 14 November 2022 .
  31. Günel, G. , Varma, S. and Watanabe, C. (2020), ‘A manifesto for patchwork ethnography’, Member Voices, Fieldsights, 9 June, https://culanth.org/fieldsights/a-manifesto-for-patchwork-ethnography. Accessed 9 January 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hagen, A. N. (2015), ‘The playlist experience: Personal playlists in music streaming services’, Popular Music and Society, 38:5, pp. 625–45, https://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2015.1021174.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Hagen, A. N. and Lüders, M. (2017), ‘Social streaming? Navigating music as personal and social’, Convergence, 23:6, pp. 643–59.324
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Hargittai, E. and Sandvig, C. (2015), Digital Research Confidential: The Secrets of Studying Behavior Online, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Harper, P. C. (2019), ‘BEYONCÉ: Viral techniques and the visual album’, Popular Music and Society, 42:1, pp. 61–81, https://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2019.1555895.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Harper, P. C. (2020), ‘Receiving, remixing, recuperating “Rebecca Black—Friday”’, American Music, 38:2, pp. 217–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Hesmondhalgh, D. (2021), ‘Is music streaming bad for musicians? Problems of evidence and argument’, New Media & Society, 23:12, pp. 3593–615.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Hesmondhalgh, D. , Jones, E. and Rauh, A. (2019), ‘SoundCloud and Bandcamp as alternative music platforms’, Social Media + Society, 5:4, p. 2056305119883429.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Hine, C. (2020), Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied and Everyday, Oxon and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Hracs, B. J. , Seman, M. and Virani, T. E. (eds) (2016), The Production and Consumption of Music in the Digital Age, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. ICO (2022), Guide to the UK General Data Protection Regulation, https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
  42. Johansson, S. , Werner, A. , Åker, P. and Goldenzwaig, G. (eds) (2018), Streaming Music: Practices, Media, Cultures, Oxon and New York: Routledge. E-pub.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Jones, Ellis (2021), DIY Music and the Politics of Social Media, New York City: Bloomsbury Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Kaun, A. (2010), ‘Open-ended online diaries: Capturing life as it is narrated’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9:2, pp. 133–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Kitchin, R. (2017), ‘Big data: Hype or revolution?’ in L. Sloan and A. Quan-Haase (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Geismar, Haidy and Knox, Hannah (eds) (2021), Digital Anthropology, Second edition, London: Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781000185423. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  47. Knox, H. and Nafus, D. (eds) (2018), Ethnography for a Data-Saturated World, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Light, Ben, Burgess, Jean and Duguay, Stephanie (2018), ‘The walkthrough method: An approach to the study of apps’, New Media and Society, 20:3, pp. 881–900.
  49. Lupton, D. (ed.) (2021), ‘Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document)’, revised version, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clGjGABB2h2qbduTgfqribHmog9B6P0NvMgVuiHZCl8/edit. Accessed 24 June 2022 .
  50. Lysloff, R. T. A. and Gay, L. C. (eds) (2003), Music and Technoculture, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Malbois, F. (2021), ‘Doing digital ethnography: Some reflections on what it means to study society through the internet’, Bulletin of the Swiss Sociological Association, 159, pp. 9–14, https://bit.ly/3yzHExh. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Marcus, G. E. (1998), ‘On ideologies of reflexivity in contemporary efforts to remake the human sciences’, in G. Marcus (ed.), Ethnography through Thick and Thin, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 181–202.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Markham, A. N. (2013), ‘Fieldwork in social media: What would Malinowski do?’ Qualitative Communication Research, 2:4, pp. 434–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Markham, A. N. (2017), ‘Ethnography in the digital era: From fields to flows, descriptions to interventions’, in N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds), The Sage Handbook for Qualitative Research, 5th ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, pp. 650–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Markham, A. N. and Baym, N. (eds) (2009), Internet Inquiry: Conversations about Method, Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Markham, A. and Buchanan, E. (2012), Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee Report (Version 2.0), https://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Markham, A. N. , Tiidenberg, K. and Herman, A. (2018), ‘Ethics as method: Introduction’, Social Media + Society, 4:2, pp. 1–9.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Mayr, P. and Weller, K. (2017), ‘Think before you collect: Setting up a data collection approach for social media studies’, in L. Sloan and A. Quan-Haase (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage, pp. 107–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Mazierska, E. , Gillon, L. and Rigg, T. (eds) (2018), Popular Music in the Post-digital Age: Politics, Economy, Culture and Technology, Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. McCourt, T. and Burkart, P. (2003), ‘When creators, corporations and consumers collide: Napster and the development of on-line music distribution’, Media, Culture & Society, 25:3, pp. 333–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Meme Studies Research Network (2020), Meme Studies Reading List, version April 2020, https://memestudiesrn.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/meme-studies-reading-list-1.pdf. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  62. Miller, D. (2012), ‘Social networking sites’, in H. Horst and D. Miller (eds), Digital Anthropology, London: Bloomsbury, pp. 146–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Miller, D. and Slater, D. (2000), The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach, Oxford: Berg.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Miller, Daniel , Costa, Elisabetta, Haynes, Nell, McDonald, Tom, Nicolescu, Razvan, Sinanan, Jolynna, Spyer, Juliano, Venkatraman, Shriram and Wang, Xinyuan (2016), How the World Changed Social Media, London: UCL Press.325
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Milligan, C. and Bartlett, R. (2019), ‘Solicited diary methods’, in P. Liamputtong (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, Singapore: Springer Singapore, pp. 1447–64, http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_15. Accessed 24 July 2024 .
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Mjøs, O. J. (2012), Music, Social Media, and Global Mobility: MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Moretti, V. (2021), ‘Dear (digital) diary: Evaluating the audio diary technique as a research method’, in G. Punziano and A. Delli Paoli (eds), Advances in Knowledge Acquisition, Transfer, and Management, Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global, pp. 375–89, https://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/978-1-7998-8473-6.ch023. Accessed 24 July 2024 .
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Morris, J. and Powers, D. (2015), ‘Control, curation and musical experience in streaming music services’, Creative Industries Journal, 8:2, pp. 106–22, https://doi.org/10.1080/17510694.2015.1090222.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Nowak, R. (2016), Consuming Music in the Digital Age: Technology, Roles and Everyday Life, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Nowak, R. and Whelan, A. (2016), Networked Music Cultures: Contemporary Approaches, Emerging Issues, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Lumivero (2020), ‘COVID-19 and Doing Virtual Fieldwork’, hosted by Deborah Lupton, https://lumivero.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/NVivo-Webinar-Covid-19-and-Virtual-Fieldwork.pdf. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  72. Pink, S. (2011), ‘Sensory digital photography: Rethinking “moving” and the image’, Visual Studies, 26:1, pp. 4–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Pink, S. , Horst, H. , Postill, J. , Hjorth, L. , Lewis, T. and Tacchi, J. (2015), Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Postill, J. (2017), ‘Remote ethnography: Studying culture from afar’, in L. Hjorth , H. Horst , A. Galloway and G. Bell (eds), The Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography, New York and London: Routledge, pp. 61–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Postill, J. and Pink, S. (2012), ‘Social media ethnography: The digital researcher in a messy web’, Media International Australia, 145:1, pp. 123–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Prior, N. (2018), Popular Music, Digital Technology and Society, Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Przybylski, L. (2020), Hybrid Ethnography: Online, Offline, and in Between, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Quinton, S. and Reynolds, N. (2018), Understanding Research in the Digital Age, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Seaver, N. (2022), Computing Taste: Algorithms and the Makers of Music Recommendation, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Sloan, L. and Quan-Haase, A. (2022), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Stock, Jonathan and Diamond, Beverly (eds) (2022), The Routledge Companion to Ethics and Research in Ethnomusicology, 1st ed., Oxon and New York: Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003043904.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Suhr, H. C. (2012), Social Media and Music, New York: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Thelwall, M. (2017), ‘Sentiment analysis’, in L. Sloan and A. Quan-Haase (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage, pp.521–530.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. TikTok Cultures Research Network (2024), TikTok Cultures Research Network bibliography, https://tiktokcultures.com/bibliography/. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  85. Waller, V. , Farquaharson, K. and Dempsey, D. (2016), Qualitative Social Research: Contemporary Methods for the Digital Age, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Walton, S. (2018), ‘Remote ethnography, virtual presence: Exploring digital-visual methods for anthropological research on the web’, in C. Costa and J. Condie (eds), Doing Research in and on the Digital: Research Methods across Fields of Inquiry, Oxford: Routledge, pp. 116–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Waugh, M. (2017), ‘“My laptop is an extension of my memory and self”: Post-internet identity, virtual intimacy and digital queering in online popular music’, Popular Music, 36:2, pp. 233–51, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143017000083.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Whiteley, S. and Rambarran, S. (2016), The Oxford Handbook of Music and Virtuality, New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Wikström, P. (2020), The Music Industry: Music in the Cloud, Cambridge: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Abidin, C. and de Seta, G. (eds) (2020), ‘Private messages from the field: Confessions on digital ethnography and its discomforts’, Journal of Digital Social Research, Special Issue: ‘Doing Digital Ethnography: Messages from the Field’, 2:1, pp. 1–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Airoldi, M. (2018), ‘Ethnography and the digital fields of social media’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21:6, pp. 661–73.323
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Allington, D. , Dueck, B. and Jordanous, A. (2015), ‘Networks of value in electronic music: SoundCloud, London, and the importance of place’, Cultural Trends, 24:3, pp. 211–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Arditi, D. (2021), Streaming Culture: Subscription Platforms and the Unending Consumption of Culture, Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Ayers, M. (ed.) (2006), Cybersounds: Essays on Virtual Music Culture, New York: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bartlett, R. and Milligan, C. (2015), What Is Diary Method?, London: Bloomsbury Academic, https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472572578.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bartlett, R. and Milligan, C. (2021), Diary Method: Research Methods, rev. ed., New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Baym, N. K. (2018), Playing to the Crowd. Musicians, Audiences and the Intimate Work of Connection, New York: New York University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Boellstorff, T. , Nardi, B. , Pearce, C. and Taylor, T. L. (2012), Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bolger, N. , Davis, A. and Rafaeli, E. (2003), ‘Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived’, Annual Review of Psychology, 54:1, pp. 579–616.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bonini, T. and Gandini, A. (2019), ‘“First week is editorial, second week is algorithmic”: Platform gatekeepers and the platformization of music curation’, Social Media + Society, 5:4, https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119880006.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Born, G. (ed.) (2022), Music and Digital Media: A Planetary Anthropology, London: UCL Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Born, G. and Barry, A. (2018), ‘Music, mediation theories and actor-network theory’, Contemporary Music Review, 37:5&6, pp. 443–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Budka, P. (2020), ‘Digital and online ethnography: A selection of resources’, 19 March, http://www.philbu.net/blog/digital-and-online-ethnography-a-selection-of-resources/. Accessed 24 June 2022 .
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Burgess, J. and Green, J. (2009), YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture, Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Burgess, J. , Marwick, A. and Poell, T. (2017), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media, London: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Caliandro, A. (2018), ‘Digital methods for ethnography: Analytical concepts for ethnographers exploring social media environments’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography , 47:5, pp. 551–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Campos Valverde, R. (2022), ‘Online musicking for humanity: The role of imagined listening and the moral economies of music sharing on social media’, Popular Music, 41:2, pp. 194–215, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143022000034.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Carter, S. and Mankoff, J. (2005), ‘When participants do the capturing: The role of media in diary studies’, in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems [Online], 2 April 2005, Portland, OR: ACM, pp. 899–908, https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.1055098. Accessed 24 July 2024 .
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Cheng, W. (2012), ‘Role-playing toward a virtual musical democracy in The Lord of the Rings online’, Ethnomusicology, 56:1 (Winter), pp. 31–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Cirucci, A. M. and Pruchniewska, U. M. (2022), UX Research Methods for Media and Communication Studies: An Introduction to Contemporary Qualitative Methods, Oxon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Couldry, N. and Mejias, U. A. (2019), ‘Data Colonialism: Rethinking Big Data's Relation to the Contemporary Subject’, Television & New Media,, 20:4, pp. 336–349, https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Crawford, K. (2009), ‘Following you: Disciplines of listening in social media’, Continuum, 23:4, pp. 525–35, https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310903003270.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Duguay, S. and Gold-Apel, H. (2023), ‘Stumbling blocks and alternative paths: Reconsidering the walkthrough method for analyzing apps’, Social Media + Society, 9:1, https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231158822.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Durham, B. (2018), ‘Curating online sounds’, in M. Bull (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Sound Studies, Oxon and New York: Routledge, pp. 231–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Ess, C. and the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (2002), Ethical Decision-making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AOIR Ethics Working Committee, https://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf.
  27. franzke, a. , Bechmann, A. , Zimmer, M. , Ess, C. and the Association of Internet Researchers (2020), Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0, https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
  28. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), https://gdpr.eu. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
  29. Glatt, Z. (2022), ‘Influencer Industries and Creator Culture reading list’ (Crowdsourced document), revised June 2022, https://zoeglatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/INFLUENCER-INDUSTRIES-CREATOR-CULTURE-Collective-Reading-List-June-2022.pdf. Accessed 24 June 2022 .
  30. Glatt, Z. and Spector, B. (2022), ‘Digital Ethnography Collective reading list’ (Crowdsourced document), revised October 2022, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RaFQdQFdijQs6eQ_UlZRBuF30oD80uvisDyJXFjwuzw/edit#heading=h.wmsucdu7m3fo. Accessed 14 November 2022 .
  31. Günel, G. , Varma, S. and Watanabe, C. (2020), ‘A manifesto for patchwork ethnography’, Member Voices, Fieldsights, 9 June, https://culanth.org/fieldsights/a-manifesto-for-patchwork-ethnography. Accessed 9 January 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hagen, A. N. (2015), ‘The playlist experience: Personal playlists in music streaming services’, Popular Music and Society, 38:5, pp. 625–45, https://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2015.1021174.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Hagen, A. N. and Lüders, M. (2017), ‘Social streaming? Navigating music as personal and social’, Convergence, 23:6, pp. 643–59.324
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Hargittai, E. and Sandvig, C. (2015), Digital Research Confidential: The Secrets of Studying Behavior Online, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Harper, P. C. (2019), ‘BEYONCÉ: Viral techniques and the visual album’, Popular Music and Society, 42:1, pp. 61–81, https://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2019.1555895.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Harper, P. C. (2020), ‘Receiving, remixing, recuperating “Rebecca Black—Friday”’, American Music, 38:2, pp. 217–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Hesmondhalgh, D. (2021), ‘Is music streaming bad for musicians? Problems of evidence and argument’, New Media & Society, 23:12, pp. 3593–615.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Hesmondhalgh, D. , Jones, E. and Rauh, A. (2019), ‘SoundCloud and Bandcamp as alternative music platforms’, Social Media + Society, 5:4, p. 2056305119883429.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Hine, C. (2020), Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied and Everyday, Oxon and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Hracs, B. J. , Seman, M. and Virani, T. E. (eds) (2016), The Production and Consumption of Music in the Digital Age, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. ICO (2022), Guide to the UK General Data Protection Regulation, https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
  42. Johansson, S. , Werner, A. , Åker, P. and Goldenzwaig, G. (eds) (2018), Streaming Music: Practices, Media, Cultures, Oxon and New York: Routledge. E-pub.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Jones, Ellis (2021), DIY Music and the Politics of Social Media, New York City: Bloomsbury Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Kaun, A. (2010), ‘Open-ended online diaries: Capturing life as it is narrated’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9:2, pp. 133–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Kitchin, R. (2017), ‘Big data: Hype or revolution?’ in L. Sloan and A. Quan-Haase (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Geismar, Haidy and Knox, Hannah (eds) (2021), Digital Anthropology, Second edition, London: Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781000185423. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  47. Knox, H. and Nafus, D. (eds) (2018), Ethnography for a Data-Saturated World, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Light, Ben, Burgess, Jean and Duguay, Stephanie (2018), ‘The walkthrough method: An approach to the study of apps’, New Media and Society, 20:3, pp. 881–900.
  49. Lupton, D. (ed.) (2021), ‘Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd-sourced document)’, revised version, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clGjGABB2h2qbduTgfqribHmog9B6P0NvMgVuiHZCl8/edit. Accessed 24 June 2022 .
  50. Lysloff, R. T. A. and Gay, L. C. (eds) (2003), Music and Technoculture, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Malbois, F. (2021), ‘Doing digital ethnography: Some reflections on what it means to study society through the internet’, Bulletin of the Swiss Sociological Association, 159, pp. 9–14, https://bit.ly/3yzHExh. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Marcus, G. E. (1998), ‘On ideologies of reflexivity in contemporary efforts to remake the human sciences’, in G. Marcus (ed.), Ethnography through Thick and Thin, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 181–202.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Markham, A. N. (2013), ‘Fieldwork in social media: What would Malinowski do?’ Qualitative Communication Research, 2:4, pp. 434–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Markham, A. N. (2017), ‘Ethnography in the digital era: From fields to flows, descriptions to interventions’, in N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds), The Sage Handbook for Qualitative Research, 5th ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, pp. 650–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Markham, A. N. and Baym, N. (eds) (2009), Internet Inquiry: Conversations about Method, Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Markham, A. and Buchanan, E. (2012), Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee Report (Version 2.0), https://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2022 .
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Markham, A. N. , Tiidenberg, K. and Herman, A. (2018), ‘Ethics as method: Introduction’, Social Media + Society, 4:2, pp. 1–9.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Mayr, P. and Weller, K. (2017), ‘Think before you collect: Setting up a data collection approach for social media studies’, in L. Sloan and A. Quan-Haase (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage, pp. 107–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Mazierska, E. , Gillon, L. and Rigg, T. (eds) (2018), Popular Music in the Post-digital Age: Politics, Economy, Culture and Technology, Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. McCourt, T. and Burkart, P. (2003), ‘When creators, corporations and consumers collide: Napster and the development of on-line music distribution’, Media, Culture & Society, 25:3, pp. 333–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Meme Studies Research Network (2020), Meme Studies Reading List, version April 2020, https://memestudiesrn.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/meme-studies-reading-list-1.pdf. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  62. Miller, D. (2012), ‘Social networking sites’, in H. Horst and D. Miller (eds), Digital Anthropology, London: Bloomsbury, pp. 146–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Miller, D. and Slater, D. (2000), The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach, Oxford: Berg.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Miller, Daniel , Costa, Elisabetta, Haynes, Nell, McDonald, Tom, Nicolescu, Razvan, Sinanan, Jolynna, Spyer, Juliano, Venkatraman, Shriram and Wang, Xinyuan (2016), How the World Changed Social Media, London: UCL Press.325
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Milligan, C. and Bartlett, R. (2019), ‘Solicited diary methods’, in P. Liamputtong (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, Singapore: Springer Singapore, pp. 1447–64, http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_15. Accessed 24 July 2024 .
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Mjøs, O. J. (2012), Music, Social Media, and Global Mobility: MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Moretti, V. (2021), ‘Dear (digital) diary: Evaluating the audio diary technique as a research method’, in G. Punziano and A. Delli Paoli (eds), Advances in Knowledge Acquisition, Transfer, and Management, Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global, pp. 375–89, https://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/978-1-7998-8473-6.ch023. Accessed 24 July 2024 .
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Morris, J. and Powers, D. (2015), ‘Control, curation and musical experience in streaming music services’, Creative Industries Journal, 8:2, pp. 106–22, https://doi.org/10.1080/17510694.2015.1090222.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Nowak, R. (2016), Consuming Music in the Digital Age: Technology, Roles and Everyday Life, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Nowak, R. and Whelan, A. (2016), Networked Music Cultures: Contemporary Approaches, Emerging Issues, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Lumivero (2020), ‘COVID-19 and Doing Virtual Fieldwork’, hosted by Deborah Lupton, https://lumivero.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/NVivo-Webinar-Covid-19-and-Virtual-Fieldwork.pdf. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  72. Pink, S. (2011), ‘Sensory digital photography: Rethinking “moving” and the image’, Visual Studies, 26:1, pp. 4–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Pink, S. , Horst, H. , Postill, J. , Hjorth, L. , Lewis, T. and Tacchi, J. (2015), Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Postill, J. (2017), ‘Remote ethnography: Studying culture from afar’, in L. Hjorth , H. Horst , A. Galloway and G. Bell (eds), The Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography, New York and London: Routledge, pp. 61–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Postill, J. and Pink, S. (2012), ‘Social media ethnography: The digital researcher in a messy web’, Media International Australia, 145:1, pp. 123–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Prior, N. (2018), Popular Music, Digital Technology and Society, Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Przybylski, L. (2020), Hybrid Ethnography: Online, Offline, and in Between, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Quinton, S. and Reynolds, N. (2018), Understanding Research in the Digital Age, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Seaver, N. (2022), Computing Taste: Algorithms and the Makers of Music Recommendation, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Sloan, L. and Quan-Haase, A. (2022), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Stock, Jonathan and Diamond, Beverly (eds) (2022), The Routledge Companion to Ethics and Research in Ethnomusicology, 1st ed., Oxon and New York: Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003043904.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Suhr, H. C. (2012), Social Media and Music, New York: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Thelwall, M. (2017), ‘Sentiment analysis’, in L. Sloan and A. Quan-Haase (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: Sage, pp.521–530.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. TikTok Cultures Research Network (2024), TikTok Cultures Research Network bibliography, https://tiktokcultures.com/bibliography/. Accessed 9 January 2025.
  85. Waller, V. , Farquaharson, K. and Dempsey, D. (2016), Qualitative Social Research: Contemporary Methods for the Digital Age, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Walton, S. (2018), ‘Remote ethnography, virtual presence: Exploring digital-visual methods for anthropological research on the web’, in C. Costa and J. Condie (eds), Doing Research in and on the Digital: Research Methods across Fields of Inquiry, Oxford: Routledge, pp. 116–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Waugh, M. (2017), ‘“My laptop is an extension of my memory and self”: Post-internet identity, virtual intimacy and digital queering in online popular music’, Popular Music, 36:2, pp. 233–51, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143017000083.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Whiteley, S. and Rambarran, S. (2016), The Oxford Handbook of Music and Virtuality, New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Wikström, P. (2020), The Music Industry: Music in the Cloud, Cambridge: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9781835951033.c18
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
/content/books/9781835951033.c18
dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9781835951033
Book
false
en
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test