
doi: 10.17645/mac.v1i1.70
handle: 11245/1.396993
Over the past decade, social media platforms have penetrated deeply into the mechanics of everyday life, affecting people's informal interactions, as well as institutional structures and professional routines. Far from being neutral platforms for everyone, social media have changed the conditions and rules of social interaction. In this article, we examine the intricate dynamic between social media platforms, mass media, users, and social institutions by calling attention to social media logic—the norms, strategies, mechanisms, and economies—underpinning its dynamics. This logic will be considered in light of what has been identified as mass media logic, which has helped spread the media's powerful discourse outside its institutional boundaries. Theorizing social media logic, we identify four grounding principles—programmability, popularity, connectivity, and datafication—and argue that these principles become increasingly entangled with mass media logic. The logic of social media, rooted in these grounding principles and strategies, is gradually invading all areas of public life. Besides print news and broadcasting, it also affects law and order, social activism, politics, and so forth. Therefore, its sustaining logic and widespread dissemination deserve to be scrutinized in detail in order to better understand its impact in various domains. Concentrating on the tactics and strategies at work in social media logic, we reassess the constellation of power relationships in which social practices unfold, raising questions such as: How does social media logic modify or enhance existing mass media logic? And how is this new media logic exported beyond the boundaries of (social or mass) media proper? The underlying principles, tactics, and strategies may be relatively simple to identify, but it is much harder to map the complex connections between platforms that distribute this logic: users that employ them, technologies that drive them, economic structures that scaffold them, and institutional bodies that incorporate them.
Facebook, platform analysis, Social Psychology, 070, analysis, social media, Twitter, interaction, everyday life, Impact Research, Recipient Research, Logik, mass media, Soziale Medien, Benutzer, Psychology, user, facebook, News media, journalism, publishing, Wirkungsforschung, Rezipientenforschung, logic, Alltag, Communication. Mass media, 10800, Interaktion, Massenmedien, Analyse, P87-96, 300, Psychologie, Auswirkung, impact, 10700, twitter, Publizistische Medien, Journalismus,Verlagswesen, media activism, Sozialpsychologie, viral, ddc: ddc:070, ddc: ddc:150
Facebook, platform analysis, Social Psychology, 070, analysis, social media, Twitter, interaction, everyday life, Impact Research, Recipient Research, Logik, mass media, Soziale Medien, Benutzer, Psychology, user, facebook, News media, journalism, publishing, Wirkungsforschung, Rezipientenforschung, logic, Alltag, Communication. Mass media, 10800, Interaktion, Massenmedien, Analyse, P87-96, 300, Psychologie, Auswirkung, impact, 10700, twitter, Publizistische Medien, Journalismus,Verlagswesen, media activism, Sozialpsychologie, viral, ddc: ddc:070, ddc: ddc:150
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 924 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 0.1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
