From re-viewers to me-viewers: The #Bookstagram review sphere on Instagram and the uses of the perceived platform and genre affordances

References

1. Abidin, Crystal. ( 2017;), ‘ #Familygoals: Family influencers, calibrated amateurism, and justifying young digital labour. ’, Social Media + Society, 3:2, pp. 1–15.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bausells, Marta. ( 2015;), ‘ Subway book review glimpses the lives of New Yorkers via the books they read. ’, The Guardian, 5 October, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/oct/05/subway-book-review-glimpses-the-lives-of-new-yorkers-via-the-books-they-read. Accessed 8 January 2019.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Blank, Grant. ( 2007), Critics, Ratings, and Society: The Sociology of Reviews, Lanham, MD:: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers;.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bolin, Göran. ( 2011), Value and the Media: Cultural Production and Consumption in Digital Markets, London and New York:: Routledge;.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Boot, Peter. ( 2011;), ‘ Towards a genre analysis of online book discussion: Socializing, participation and publication in the Dutch booksphere. ’, Selected Papers of Internet Research, Chicago, IL:: Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR);.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Burgess, Jean E.. ( 2006;), ‘ Hearing ordinary voices: Cultural studies, vernacular creativity and digital storytelling. ’ Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 2, pp. 201–14.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bruns, Axel. ( 2008), Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond, New York:: Peter Lang;.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bruns, Axel. ( 2018;), ‘ Facebook shuts the gate after the horse has bolted, and hurts real research in the process. ’, Internet Policy Review , 25 April, https://policyreview.info/articles/news/facebook-shuts-gate-after-horse-has-bolted-and-hurts-real-research-process/786. Accessed 8 June 2018.
9. Bryman, Alan. ( 2016), Social Research Methods, , 5th ed.., Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Caliandro, Alessandro, and Candini, Alessandro. ( 2017), Qualitative Research in Digital Environments: A Research Toolkit, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Couldry, Nick,, Livingstone, Sonia, and Markham, Tim. ( 2010), Media Consumption and Public Engagement: Beyond the Presumption of Attention, London:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Curran, James, and Morley David. (eds) ( 2006), Media and Cultural Theory, Abingdon and New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Domsch, Sebastian. ( 2009;), ‘ Critical genres: Generic changes of literary criticism in computer-mediated communication. ’, in J. Giltrow, and D. Stein. (eds), Genres in the Internet: Issues in the Theory of Genre, Amsterdam:: John Benjamins Publishing Company;, pp. 221–38.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Frey, Mattias, and Sayad, Cecilia. (eds) ( 2015), Film Criticism in the Digital Age, New Brunswick:: Rutgers University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Gibbs, Martin,, Meese, James,, Arnold, Michael,, Nansen, Bjorn, and Carter, Marcus. ( 2015;), ‘ #Funeral and Instagram: Death, social media, and platform vernacular. ’ Information, Communication & Society, 18:3, pp. 255–68.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Gibson, James J.. ( 1979), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Boston, MA:: Houghton Mifflin;.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Giltrow, Janet, and Stein, Dieter. (eds) ( 2009), Genres in the Internet: Issues in the Theory of Genre, Amsterdam:: John Benjamins Publishing Company;.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Goffman, Erving. ( 1990), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, London:: Penguin;.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Grafton, Kathryn. ( 2010), Paying Attention to Public Readers of Canadian Literature: Popular Genre Systems, Publics, and Canons, Vancouver:: University of British Columbia;.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Guest, Gren,, MacQueen, Kathleen M., and Namey, Emily E.. ( 2012), Applied Thematic Analysis, London:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Hayes, Elizabeth R., and Gee, James R.. ( 2010;), ‘ Public pedagogy through video games: Design, resources, and affinity spaces. ’, in J. A. Sandlin,, B. D. Schultz, and J. Burdick. (eds), Handbook of Public Pedagogy: Education and Learning Beyond Schooling, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 116–24.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Hohendahl, Peter U.. ( 1982), The Institution of Criticism, Ithaca, NY:: Cornell University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Ito, Mizuko. ( 2010;), ‘ The rewards of non-commercial production: Distinctions and status in the anime music video scene. ’, First Monday, 15:5, https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2968/2528. Accessed 10 June 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Jaakkola, Maarit. ( 2018;), ‘ Vernacular reviews as a form of co-consumption. The user-generated review videos on YouTube. ’, Mediekultur, 34:65, pp. 10–30.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Jaakkola, Maarit. ( forthcoming 2019;), ‘ From vernacularized commercialism to kidbait: Toy review videos on YouTube and the problematics of the mash-up genre. ’, Journal of Children and Media.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Jenkins, Henry. ( 2006), Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, New York:: New York University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Kammer, Aske. ( 2015;), ‘ Post-industrial cultural criticism: The everyday amateur expert and the online cultural public sphere. ’, Journalism Practice, 9:6, pp. 872–89.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Kim, Jin. ( 2012;), ‘ The institutionalization of YouTube: From user-generated content to professionally generated content. ’, Media, Culture & Society, 34:1, pp. 53–67.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Kristensen, Nete Nørgaard, and From, Unni. ( 2017;), ‘ From ivory tower to cross-media personas: The heterogeneous cultural critic in the media. ’, in N. N. Kristensen, and U. From. (eds), Cultural Journalism and Cultural Critique in the Media, Abingdon:: Routledge;, pp. 94–112.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Leadbeater, Charles, and Miller, Paul. ( 2004), The Pro-am Revolution, London:: Demoso;.
    [Google Scholar]
31. McWhirther, Andrew. ( 2016), Film Criticism and Digital Cultures: Journalism, Social Media and the Democratization of Opinion, London:: IB Tauris;.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Miller, Carolyn R., and Shepherd, Dawn. ( 2009;), ‘ Questions for genre theory from the blogosphere. ’, in J. Giltrow, and D. Stein. (eds), Genres in the Internet: Issues in the Theory of Genre, Amsterdam:: John Benjamins Publishing Company;, pp. 263–90.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Naseem, Faroukh. ( 2018;), ‘ Bookstagram for beginners!. ’, The Guy with the Book , 17 May, http://theguywiththebook.com/2018/05/17/bookstagram-for-beginners. Accessed 8 January 2019.
34. NBRC, Nothing but Reading Challenges ( 2013;), ‘ What is buddy read? How does it work?. ’, Goodreads , 19 May, https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1333468-what-is-a-buddy-read-how-does-it-work. Accessed 8 January 2019.
35. Nicoll, Benjamin, and Nansen, Bjorn. ( 2018;), ‘ Mimetic production in YouTube toy unboxing videos. ’, Social Media + Society, 4:3, pp. 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Norman, Donald A.. ( 1999;), ‘ Affordance, conventions, and design. ’, Interactions, 6:3, pp. 38–42.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Orlik, Peter B.. ( 2016), Media Criticism in a Digital Age: Professional and Consumer Considerations, London:: Taylor & Francis;.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Schwemmer, Carsten, and Ziewiecki, Sandra. ( 2018;), ‘ Social media sellout: The increasing role of product promotion on YouTube. ’, Social Media + Society, 4:3, pp. 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Smith, Aaron, and Anderson, Monica. ( 2018;), ‘ Social media use in 2018. ’, Pew Research Center;, 1 March, http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/. Accessed 6 December 2018.
40. Steiner, Ann. ( 2008;), ‘ Private criticism in the public space: Personal writing on literature in readers’ reviews on Amazon. ’, Participations, 5:2, http://www.participations.org/Volume%205/Issue%202/5_02_steiner.htm. Accessed 10 June 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Steiner, Ann. ( 2010;), ‘ Personal readings and public texts: Book blogs and online writing about literature. ’, Culture Unbound, 2:2, pp. 471–94.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Titchener, Campbell B.. ( 1998), Reviewing the Arts, , 3rd ed.., New York:: Lawrence Erlbaum;.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Toffler, Alvin. ( 1980), The Third Wave, London:: Collins;.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Verboord, Marc. ( 2010;), ‘ The legitimacy of book critics in the age of the Internet and omnivorousness: Expert critics, Internet critics and peer critics in Flanders and the Netherlands. ’, European Sociological Review, 26:6, pp. 623–37.
    [Google Scholar]
45. WordStream ( 2019;), ‘ 33 mind-boggling Instagram stats & facts for 2018. ’, 9 April, https://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2017/04/20/instagram-statistics. Accessed 25 June 2019.
46. Jaakkola, M.. ( 2019;), ‘ From re-viewers to me-viewers: The #Bookstagram review sphere on Instagram and the uses of the perceived platform and genre affordances. ’, Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 10:1&2, pp. 91–110, doi: 10.1386/iscc.10.1-2.91_1
    [Google Scholar]