06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper
Youth and Social Media. In Focus: Antifeminist Violence
Anja Roß
Universität Oldenburg, Germany
Presenting Author: Roß, Anja
As digitalisation progresses, young people’s media use is increasing (Albert et al., 2019, Anderson, Faverio and Gottfried, 2023, Feierabend, S., Rathgeb, T., Kheremand, H., & Glöckler, 2023). The lives of young people today are increasingly mediatised and are shifting to social media platforms. Studies on media use show that young people also come into contact with negative topics such as hate speech on these platforms (Albert et al., 2019, Feierabend, S., Rathgeb, T., Kheremand, H., & Glöckler, 2022; Forsa, 2023). In this context, media education research focuses on questions about the perception and evaluation of hate speech (Albert et al., 2019, Feierabend, S., Rathgeb, T., Kheremand, H., & Glöckler, 2022) as well as the question of how educators can address hate speech in an educational context and help to prevent it (Marolla-Gajardo & Castellví-Mata, 2023, Seemann-Herz et al., 2022).
So far, we have little knowledge about who is engaging in digital hate and for what purpose, and what strategies might be helpful in dealing with the phenomenon. This is the starting point for the research work presented in this paper, which has generated valuable findings for media education research.
Eight interviews with feminist net activists were conducted using a qualitative research design. The research questions focused on the activists’ feminist self-image and their experiences with digital violence. The focus was on the question of whether they accept being silenced or whether they have developed strategies and resources that they can draw on when dealing with digital violence.
An exploration of the basic feminist attitude of the activists was carried out through theoretical references to feminist discourses such as the social construction of gender (Gildemeister & Wetterer, 1992; Goffman, 1977; Kessler & McKenna, 1978; Hagemann-White, 1984), deconstructionism (Derrida, 1987; Kahlert, 2000; Butler, 1991), queer theory (Hark, 2009; Jagose, 1996; Woltersdorf, 2003) and intersectional feminism (Crenshaw, 1989, 2013; Winker & Degele, 2009; Yuval-Davis, 2013). The descriptions and analyses of the haters were embedded in the discourse field of antifeminism (Lang & Peters, 2018; Planert 1998; Schutzbach, 2018), especially in current publications on antigenderism (Dağlar-Sezer, & Beaufaӱs, 2021; Ganz & Meßmer, 2015; Hark & Villa, 2015; Henninger & Birsl, 2020; Maurer, 2018; Schmincke, 2018). In order to pursue their goals as effectively as possible, coalitions and alliances are often formed between different groups (Blum, 2019; Lang & Peters, 2018; Strube, Perintfalvi, Hemet, Metze & Sahbaz, 2021).
The results of my study revealed that the haters are part of the anti-feminist spectrum and are characterised by racist, sexist and trans-hostile attitudes (Roß, forthcoming). Antifeminist actors are well organised and try to ban feminist voices from the digital space (Blum, 2019; Dafaure, 2022; Huang, 2023; Roß, forthcoming). Networking between groups is crucial to the effectiveness of antifeminist violence (Drüeke, 2016; Lang & Peters, 2018; Roß, forthcoming).
As the study participants all have displayed a queer and intersectional understanding of feminism, it can be assumed that this is relevant to the experience of anti-feminist hostility. It was found that the activists are particularly affected by digital hatred when they themselves are read as non-white and fall outside the heterosexual norm in terms of their gender identity or gender orientation (Roß, forthcoming).
When young people become victims of digital hatred due to their gender identity, gender orientation or ethnicity deviating from the “norm”, it is possible that organised antifeminists are behind the digital hostility. In contrast to the respondents in this study, who have developed numerous strategies for dealing with anti-feminist violence and have a feminist network to fall back on, young people are much more vulnerable.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedAs this study constitutes basic research, the empirical data was collected using qualitative methods. The author conducted eight semi-structured, guideline-based interviews, which were analysed using Mayring’s qualitative content analysis method (Mayring, 2015).
Semi-structured, guideline-based interviews were selected as the data collection instrument for this study because they are structured and open at the same time. In concrete terms, this means that predetermined guiding questions can be used to provide impulses on research-relevant topics (structural specification) and at the same time allow an open space for the development of thoughts and new topics (openness) (Helfferich, 2009b).
The interview guide for this study was initially developed using the SPSS method according to Helfferich (2011). The structure of the guide-based interview followed the rule ‘from the general to the specific’. The interview guide for this study consists of four blocks, each of which is assigned to a topic.
The starting point for recruiting the interviewees was the German-language feminist blog “Die Mädchenmannschaft” (https://maedchenmannschaft.net/), which was founded in 2007 and describes itself as a “community blog on feminist history, theory and practice” (Mädchenmannschaft).
The interviews were conducted over a period of six months, from October 2018 to April 2019, in northern Germany and ranged in length from 72 to 104 minutes.
The interviews were analysed using the qualitative content analysis method. This method was chosen because it combines the requirement of a structured and comprehensible evaluation process with the idea of reflecting on the data, and the interactive character of the data’s creation (Kuckartz, 2018).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsWhen talking about young people’s media use, we cannot avoid shedding light also on the negative, challenging aspects associated with it. The social web is not only used for communication, inspiration and entertainment, but has also become a political tool used by various interest groups.
The study “Feminismus im Netz – intersektional, empowernd, angreifbar?! ” (eng.: Feminism on the Net-intersectional, empowering, vulnerable?) (Roß, forthcoming) has brought to light the force with which anti-feminist movements attempt to ban feminist voices. It is not surprising that feminist activists who explicitly position themselves in a queer-feminist and intersectional discourse are under attack. This is contrary to the reactionary views of anti-feminist actors who, on the one hand, see themselves back in a binary and hierarchically structured world of gender and, on the other hand, do not want to question their privileged national and white identity.
If the social web is to remain a democratic place that can be used by all young people in a participatory manner, media education must address the problem of anti-feminist violence. From the study presented here, it can be concluded that it is possible to develop and apply strategies for dealing with anti-feminist violence. The prerequisite for this is that structures are developed through which young users can empower each other and stand by each other in solidarity. The first step in this direction lies in the task of critically analysing anti-feminist narratives. This can be done collectively in the context of media education at school.
The academic study of anti-democratic, anti-feminist currents in the context of media education is an area that deserves a great deal of attention in future research. Not only in Germany, but everywhere where the shift to the right is already clearly visible in the political landscape.
ReferencesAlbert, M., Hurrelmann, K., & Quenzel, G. (2019). Jugend 2019: Eine Generation meldet sich zu Wort (1. Auflage.). Beltz.
Anderson, M., Faverio, N. & Gottfried, F. (2023): Teens, Social Media and Technology 2023. Pex Research Center, Washington DC
Ballaschk, C., Schulze-Reichelt, F., Wachs, S., Krause, N., Wettstein, A., Kansok-Dusche, J., Bilz, L., & Schubarth, W. (2022). Ist das (schon) Hatespeech? – Eine qualitative Untersuchung zum Verständnis von Hatespeech unter pädagogischem Schulpersonal. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 12(3), 579–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s35834-022-00367-1
Bonet-Marti, J. (2021). Antifeminism as a countermovement: A literature review of the main theoretical perspectives and current debates. TEKNOKULTURA: REVISTA DE CULTURA DIGITAL Y MOVIMIENTOS SOCIALES, 18(1), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.5209/TEKN.71303
Dafaure, M. (2022). Memes, trolls and the manosphere: Mapping the manifold expressions of antifeminism and misogyny online. European Journal of English Studies, 26(2), 236–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825577.2022.2091299
Decker, O., Kiess, J., Heller, A., & Brähler, E. (2022). Autoritäre Dynamiken in unsicheren Zeiten: Leipziger Autoritarismus Studie 2022. Psychosozial-Verlag. https://www.theol.uni-leipzig.de/fileadmin/ul/Dokumente/221109_Leipziger-Autoritarismus-Studie.pdf
Drüeke, R., & Peil, C. (2019). Haters gonna Hate. Antifeministische Artikulationen in digitalen Öffentlichkeiten. In Backlash?! Antifeminismus in Wissenschaft, Politik und Gesellschaft (pp. 191-212). Roßdorf: Ulrike Helmer Verlag.
Landesanstalt für Medien NRW (2023): Hate Speech Forsa Studie 2023
Huang, Qiqi (2023) Anti-Feminism: four strategies for the demonisation and depoliticisation of feminism on Chinese social media, Feminist Media Studies, 23:7, 3583-3598, DOI: 10.1080/14680777.2022.2129412
Helfferich, C. (2011). Die Qualität qualitativer Daten: Manual für die Durchführung qualitativer Interviews (4. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Kuckartz, U. (2018). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. (4. Aufl.). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
Reinhardt, S. (2023). Discourse coalitions against gender and sexual equality: Antifeminism as a common denominator between the radical right and the mainstream? Feminist Media Studies, 23(6), 2831–2848.
Marolla-Gajardo & Castellví-Mata (2023): Transform hate speech in education from gender perspectives. Conceptions of Chilean teachers through a case study. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1267690
Mayring, P. (2016). Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung (6. Aufl.). Weinheim: Beltz Verlagsgruppe.
Feierabend, S., Rathgeb, T., Kheremand, H., & Glöckler, S. (2022). JIM 2020: Jugend, Information, Medien – Basisuntersuchung zum Medienumgang 12- bis 19-Jähriger in Weinheim: Beltz Verlagsgruppe.
Seemann-Herz, L., Kansok-Dusche, J., Dix, A., Wachs, S., Krause, N., Ballaschk, C., Schulze-Reichelt, F., & Bilz, L. (2022). Schulbezogene Programme zum Umgang mit Hatespeech – Eine kriteriengeleitete Bestandsaufnahme. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 12(3), 597–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s35834-022-00348-4
06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper
The Pedagogical Value of Memes in a Context of Democracy and Participation – A Scoping Review
Jonas Christoffer Berger
Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences
Presenting Author: Berger, Jonas Christoffer
What can we learn from research into memes as a pedagogical phenomenon in democratic or participatory contexts? The primary aim of this scoping review is to map the current knowledge about the pedagogical value of memes in participatory and democratic contexts. As secondary research question, the papers also asks what democratic and participatory understandings the field of research is grounded in.
According to Shifman (2014, pp. 39-42) memes are a form of communication between people or groups of people, often digital, and often consisting of visual or audiovisual media. Moreover, memes are commonly understood to be humoristic in nature; the humoristic aspect of memes has also been linked to democratic and participatory functions (Anderson & Keehn, 2020), and the possible value it may have for educators. This further raises the questions of whether we know more about the pedagogical value of memes in the context of democracy and participation, and how this research can be summarized and what gaps may exist in the literature.
Further theoretical perspectives can be found in Durham Peters (2020) philosophy of media, adopting the view that media is not only a tool for mediation in our different social systems, but a part of these systems themselves; the theory on memes can be expanded to define memes also as messages in themselves, meaning that they are part of our environment and carry meaning both by mediation of something and existing in themselves as part of the system.
Memes as a form of communication has in recent years become more widely researched. With perspectives ranging from memes as a political tool in specific elections (Ross & Rivers, 2019), to memes as form of identity formation in grassroots movements among marginalized groups (Burton, 2019), there is still a need to get an overview on memes as a pedagogical phenomenon in a democratic and participatory context. This paper shows the preliminary results of a sample of research in that context.
The need for this overview is based on the lack of reviews on this topic of research, particularly with regards to the pedagogical value of memes as a democratizing phenomenon. Apart from summarizing the current knowledge, another aim is to reflect upon the future of research on the topic, and what questions might need to be asked moving forward.
The paper is part of the authors Ph.d.-project.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe paper adopts the criteria for a scoping review as suggested by Arksey and O’Malley (2005, pp. 4), with the aim of “examining the extent, range and nature of research activity … to summarize and disseminate the research findings” (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005, pp. 4), and identifying the possible gaps in the collection of literature on the research topic. Further criteria are borrowed from Cohen et al. (2018, pp. 181-185), emphasising the context of the research with regards to the time of research, the geopolitical status, and the place the research has taken place, as well as the theoretical understandings of the concepts used in the field.
Several searches have been made with different iterations of the terms “memes”, “pedagogy”, “learning”, “socialisation”, “democracy”, “participation”, “education”, “political education”, citizenship” and “youth culture”. Different combinations gave several different samples. These samples were scanned by title and keywords, where those deemed relevant were downloaded to and placed in an endnote folder. Duplicates were subsequently removed with endote. 130 peer-reviewed articles were chosen from the searches in SCOPUS and Web of Science, a further 20 were found snowballing, by looking into the references of the relevant articles. The final sample of 77 is based on a stricter view on pedagogical and democratic relevance, made through skimming the abstract of the articles – the chosen articles had to have some pedagogical value, in that they examined terms such as “education”, “learning”, “socialization”, “identity” etc. Excluded were articles looking mainly at other contexts, among others covid-19 and far-right extremism, or articles in others disciplines such as linguistics or medicine. The preliminary categorization was made while reading through the abstracts. Categories that emerged were "memes as main focus", "general political", "specific political", "political engagement", "social justice", pedagogy as main focus", "climate change", "AI" (excluded), "covid-19" (excluded), and "far right" (excluded).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThis sample shows both different methodologies and perspectives pertaining to the pedagogical value of memes in learning democracy and participation. A pattern regarding the research is the possible need for more interview-data, as this method is less used than for example content analysis. Further the theoretical understanding of memes leans largely on Shifmans definition, with few perspectives differing from this view. Critical perspectives through theoretical inquiries may open up for further research on the topic.
ReferencesAnderson, M., & Keehn, G. (2020). ’OK Boomer’: Internet Memes as Consciousness
Building. Radical Teacher, 118. https://doi.org/10.5195/rt.2020.746
Arksey, H & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological Framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616
Burton, J. (2019). Look at Us, We Have Anxiety: Youth, Memes, and the Power of Online Cultural Politics. Journal of Childhood Studies, 44(3), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.18357/jcs00019171
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education. (8th Ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
Durham Peters, J. (2015). The marvelous clouds. The University of Chicago Press.
Ross, A. S. & Rivers, D. J. (2019). Internet Memes, Media Frames, and the Conflicting Logics of Climate Change Discourse. Environmental Communication-a Journal of Nature and Culture, (13)7, 975-994. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1560347
Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in digital culture. MIT press.
06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper
Challenges in Open Educational Practices: Lessons from a Digital Diversity Project and Populist Reactions
Franco Rau1, Florian Cristóbal Klenk2, Jacqueline Jaekel3
1University of Vechta, Germany; 2European University of Flensburg, Germany; 3TU Darmstadt, Germany
Presenting Author: Rau, Franco;
Klenk, Florian Cristóbal
In recent years, Open Educational Resources (OER) have gained recognition for their potential to enhance teacher education and general educational settings, as evidenced by studies such as Röwert & Kostrzewa (2021), and institutions like BMBF (2022) and UNESCO & Commonwealth of Learning (2019). While the term "Open Educational Practices" (OEP) often refers to activities involving OER, the concept, as pointed out by Bali et al. (2018) and Bellinger & Mayrberger (2020), encompasses a range of openness approaches that extend beyond or even operate independently of OER. This includes open pedagogical-participative learning scenarios using social media tools for collaborative knowledge creation. An understudied aspect in the OEP discourse is the challenges and side effects that student engagement can have.
This paper explores the challenges of OEP in addressing diversity issues, focusing on the 'Diversity goes Digital' project at TU Darmstadt as a case study. The project was initiated in response to an increase in discriminatory discourse in media spaces (Bünger and Czejkowska, 2020), where perceived differences from the dominant society (Attia et al., 2015) trigger hostility towards democratic values that educators strive to impart. This landscape includes debates on anti-genderism, rising right-wing populism and persistent racism. A key objective of the project - appropriate to the goals of Council of the European Union (2023) - was to contribute to diversity-oriented media education in teacher training and foster media literacy within a diverse, democratic society.
A central didactic approach was to enable students of teaching at vocational schools and high schools to engage in a product- and practice-oriented examination of societal orders of difference in the school context. This approach aimed to help them learn to critically examine themselves in relation to both analog and digital processes of 'doing difference' during lesson development. Furthermore, the focus was on ensuring that these future educators would neither ignore nor stigmatize the diversity of lifestyles in school practice, which is crucial for fostering an inclusive and reflective educational environment (FRA Report 2020). Therefore, students created explainer videos on topics such as heteronormativity and racism. Choosing video creation as an approach was based on its potential to engage students in simplifying complex subjects in an engaging and accurate manner (Wolf, 2015). This exercise was intended not only to help students better understand the concepts but also to develop effective communication skills essential for educators. However, these videos, shared on YouTube, faced significant right-wing populist backlash against both the students and educators.
After introducing the project, the presentation shifts focus to analyze the right-wing populist responses encountered. The leading questions are:
- Who is authoring the observed comments, and to what extent can a digital community and infrastructure be identified behind these coordinated responses?
- What disinformation strategies are evident in the patterns of comments that aim to problematize the topics of the videos and discredit the authors and educators?
The objective of this section is to highlight the potential reactions such educational projects might face, preparing stakeholders for similar challenges. This analysis contributes to supporting the European Union's perspective (2022) on tackling disinformation and promoting digital literacy through education and training.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedAn exploratory methodology was adopted to address the leading questions. The analysis involved:
(1) Examining the YouTube channel statistics of the project to contextualize the timing of comment responses.
(2) Conducting a content analysis of the comments to reconstruct various patterns within them.
(3) Performing an exploratory analysis of potential sources of the comments, leading to the identification of a specific video from a right-wing extremist community as the initiator of the series of comments on the students' explainer videos.
This methodological approach enabled an in-depth exploration of the dynamics of digital discourse, particularly focusing on how a single influential source within the right-wing extremist community can influence the narrative and public reaction to educational content about diversity. It provided critical insights into the challenges and effects that digital media has in the realms of diversity education and public discourse.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe project, involving the creation and dissemination of educational videos on diversity, revealed the complex dynamics of public engagement with digital media in educational contexts. A significant finding was the nature of the responses to these videos, especially from right-wing extremist groups. The comments and reactions were primarily characterized by know pattens like misleading contextualization, polarization, and personal defamation. This indicated a trend of using digital platforms not just for disagreement or debate, but for spreading misinformation and creating divisiveness.
Moreover examining the digital responses of right-wing populist actors provides insights into how difference is used as a political mobilization topic and how (unplannable) discursive processes on social media pose a challenge for projects in active media work and open educational practices.
The paper concludes with a reflection on the possibilities and limits of Open Educational Practices and open media work in institutionalized settings, discussing how such projects can contribute to a more inclusive and diverse digital space despite confrontations with disinformation campaigns and polarizing narratives. The project underscores the need for strategies (European Commission, 2022) to effectively navigate and counteract such negative responses in digital public discourse.
ReferencesAttia, I., Köbsell, S., & Prasa, N. (Hrsg.). (2015). Dominanzkultur reloaded. Neue Texte zu gesellschaftlichen Machtverhältnissen und ihren Wechselwirkungen. transcript. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839430613-026.
Bali, M., et al. (2020). Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2020(1), 10, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.565
Bellinger, F., & Mayrberger, K. (2019). Systematic Literature Review zu Open Educational Practices (OEP) in der Hochschule im europäischen Forschungskontext. MedienPädagogik, 18(34), 19-46. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/34/2019.02.18.X
Bünger, C., & Czejkowska, A. (2020). Political Correctness und pädagogische Kritik. In C. Bünger & A. Czejkowska (Hrsg.), Jahrbuch für Pädagogik 2018 (S. 9-20).
Council of the European Union (2023) Council Recommendation of 23 November 2023 on improving the provision of digital skills and competences in education and training. (2024). Official Journal, C 1030, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1030/oj
European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. (2022). Final report of the Commission expert group on tackling disinformation and promoting digital literacy through education and training – Final report. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/283100
FRA Report (2020): A long way to go for LGBTI equality. Link: https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2020/eu-lgbti-survey-results Kosciw, Joseph G./Clark, Caitlin M./Truong, Nhan L./Zongrone, Adrian D. (2019): The 2019 National School Climate Survey. The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender,
and Queer Youth in Our Nation's Schools. New York.
Röwert, R., & Kostrzewa, M. (2021). Phasenübergreifende Lehrkräftebildung mit und durch OER: Thesen und Impulse für eine vernetzte Lehrkräftebildung. In C. Gabellini, S. Gallner, F. Imboden, Kuurstra M., & P. Tremp (Hrsg.), Lehrentwicklung by Openess - Open Educational Resources im Hochschulkontext. Dokumentation der Tagung vom 06. März 2021 (S. 101-106). Luzern. https://doi.org/10.15480/882.3622
UNESCO & Commonwealth of Learning. (2019). Guidelines on the development of open educational resources policies. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/4822-3/pf0000371129
Wolf, K. D. (2015). Video-Tutorials und Erklärvideos als Gegenstand, Methode und Ziel der Medien- und Filmbildung. In A. Hartung-Griemberg, T. Ballhausen, C. Trültzsch-Wijnen, A. Barberi, & K. Kaiser-Müller (Hrsg.), Filmbildung im Wandel (S. 121-131). New academic press.
|
