Convenors
Enrico Fravega, University of Genoa
enrico.fravega@edu.unige.it
Rassa Ghaffari, University of Genoa
rassa.ghaffari@edu.unige.it
As Hallett and Barber (2014, p. 307) observe, engaging in ethnographic research without considering the role of online spaces is no longer feasible. In the field of migration and border studies, researchers have been involved in a range of experiences, including the exploration of digital spaces related to migration routes and the use of digital platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram, which facilitate the exchange of information, communication, and the construction of multiple imaginaries related to migration, transit, and the countries of destination. These imaginaries, in turn, shape the very routes that People-On-the-Move traverse. Moreover, digital spaces and tools have evolved from mere research subjects to indispensable instruments for accessing, monitoring, and sustaining engagement with the field, even when physical presence is relinquished. The digital sphere has thus become a subject of ethnographic inquiry, both as a space for social interactions and as a cultural space and product that has promoted practices, phenomena, and multiple social identities (Hine, 2017).
While there is a substantial body of literature on various forms of digital ethnography, nethnography, and related topics, the theoretical reflection on the implications of being immersed in both the physical and digital spheres is underdeveloped (Back, Puwar, 2012; Zijlstra, Liempt, 2017; Suarez, 2019). This «full immersion» in the digital sphere has multiple consequences for the conception of the ethnographic field and the researchers’ positionalities. Indeed, researchers are now experiencing a new and hybrid situation where the research field is neither merely «there» (the «otherness» and «otherness» within the «classical ethnography») nor is it «here» (in the immediately accessible non-local space created by digital technologies). If, on the one hand, it is more and more common for People-On-the-Move to maintain distant relations typical of proximity and to activate them daily (Diminescu, 2008), on the other hand, it can be assumed that researchers too are immersed in a «slant space» that blurs the distinction between distance and proximity, is characterised by unpredictable patterns, and challenges the traditional dichotomy between the physical and the virtual. This discussion underscores the necessity of transcending the digital «divide» or «dualism» (offline/online) to gain insight into the intertwining of digital technologies with both migrants’ and ethnographers’ activities, technologies, materialities, and emotions (Pink et al., 2015).
It is, therefore, necessary to gain a more precise understanding of the implications of the digital domain for ethnographers engaged in digital research in migration studies. As the term «field site» is defined as «the stage on which the social processes under study take place» (Burrell, 2009, p. 182), the ongoing evolution of the «digital stages» of today’s social media calls for a re-evaluation of the transposition of offline methods and concepts to the online world (Airoldi, 2018).
Furthermore, in a global scenario characterized by increasing migration turbulence (Papastergiadis, 2000), where unauthorised and irregular migration is intertwined with securitarian policies and secondary movements (Queirolo Palmas, Rahola, 2022), new perspectives are raised regarding social relations, cultural identities, and self-organisation practices across migration routes, crisscrossing the physical and digital spheres.
In light of the aforementioned premises, we welcome theoretical, methodological, and empirical contributions that address the implications of digital developments in migration and critical border studies.
Open questions
- While ethnography has always been «local» or circumscribed in specific spaces, how can we ground ethnographic work in the unbound space created by the intersection of physical and digital spheres in the field of migration studies?
- What does it mean «being there» in this new scenario?
- Within a scenery of unruly and unpredictable migration movements across the borders, how can we continue to give meaning to one of the most famous assumptions regarding (multi-sited) ethnography – «Follow the people. Follow the thing. Follow the metaphor. Follow the plot, the story or allegory. Follow the life or biography. Follow the conflict» (Marcus, 1995) – in an age when the verb «follow» has been given a brand new meaning (being in touch on social media networks)?
- How can ethnographers deal with the often overwhelming information and the unbearable emotional charge of constant contact with informants and gatekeepers through social media and messaging platforms, given that these subjects are often vulnerable, subaltern or in danger?
Keywords
borders; digital ethnography; fieldwork; migration; social media.
Sub-disciplines and cross-disciplinary areas of concern
sociology; anthropology; geography; media studies; migration studies.
References
Airoldi, M.
2018 «Ethnography and the digital fields of social media (Preprint version)», in International Journal of Social Research Methodology, pp. 1–16.
Back, L., Puwar, N.
2012 «A manifesto for live methods: Provocations and capacities», in Sociological Review, 60, suppl. 1, pp. 6–17.
Burrell, J.
2009 «The field site as a network: A strategy for locating ethnographic research», inField Methods, 21, 2, pp. 181–199.
Diminescu, D.
2008 «The connected migrant: An epistemological manifesto», in Social Science Information, 47, 4, pp. 565–579.
Hallett, R. E., Barber, K.
2014 «Ethnographic research in a cyber era», in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 43, 3, pp. 306–330.
Hine, C.
2017 «From virtual ethnography to the embedded, embodied, everyday internet», in The Routledge companion to digital ethnography, pp. 47–54, Routledge.
Marcus, G.
1995 «Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography», in Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, pp. 95–117.
Papastergiadis, N.
2000 The turbulence of migration: Globalization, deterritorialization, and hybridity. Polity Press; Blackwell Publishers.
Pink, S., Horst, H. A., Postill, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T., Tacchi, J. (Eds.)
2016 Digital ethnography: Principles and practice. SAGE.
Queirolo Palmas, L., Rahola, F.
2022 Underground Europe: Along migrant routes. Palgrave Macmillan.
Suarez, M.
2019 «What can multi-sited and digital ethnography contribute to innovation studies in the global», in African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 11, 4, pp. 495–503.
Zijlstra, J., Van Liempt, I.
2017 «Smart(phone) travelling: Understanding the use and impact of mobile technology on irregular migration journeys», in International Journal of Migration and Border Studies, 3, 2/3, 174–188.
Convenors’ bios
Enrico Fravega, PhD, is Assistant Professor (RTD-A) at the University of Genoa. In his research work, he explored the nexus between migration, housing conditions and temporalities. His methodological approach mainly relies on ethnographic and participative methods, as well as on biographical techniques. He, he is also the Coordinator of the MOBS research group (www.mobsprin2020.org). He is a member of the Visual Sociology Resesesrch Group of the University of Genoa (Laboratorio di Sociologia Visuale).
Rassa Ghaffari is an activist and post-doctoral sociologist working
mainly on migration, gender and Middle Eastern studies. She has a
Master’s degree in African and Asian Studies from the University of
Pavia and a PhD in Sociology at the University of Milano-Bicocca. In her
current research project at the University of Genova, she focuses on
illegalized migratory routes through Turkey and the so-called Balkan
route, with special attention to digital ethnography and new digital
infrastructures, Iranian migration and women on the move.