Abstract
Social media companies are ubiquitous in our social lives and public debate. They provide spaces for discussion and grant us access to journalism. In his 1962 Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit, Jürgen Habermas described how the public sphere was transformed through the introduction of modern communication systems. With the advent of social
... read more
media platforms, the public sphere has transformed again through ‘platformization’. Platformization is the process by which Big Tech companies infiltrate infrastructures, economic processes and governmental frameworks of entire public sectors, structuring them around their own practices and logics. This dissertation studies the contemporary platformized public sphere, not by focusing at the center of the public sphere, but by looking at the edges of the platform ecology, where radical or counter platform technology are situated. I do this through the concept of ‘fringe platforms’, which are defined as; alternative platform services that are established as an explicit critique of the ideological premises and practices of mainstream platform services, which strive to cause a shift in the norms of the platform ecology they contest by offering an ideologically different technology. One such platform is alt-right microblogging service Gab.com, which was subjected to a process of 'deplatformization' in 2018, when its user base was implicated in white supremacist terrorism. Deplatformization refers to tech companies’ efforts to reduce toxic content by pushing back controversial platforms and their communities to the edges of the ecosystem by denying them access to the basic infrastructural services required to function online. By studying Gab through three case studies this dissertation poses the following research questions: What is the role of fringe social media platforms in a platformized public sphere? What hierarchies and shifts in power do they signify? And how can they inform us about the platform ecosystem? In the first case study, I explore Gab as an ecosystem, and conclude that the study of fringe platforms entails a more explicit role in the analyses for a platform’s self-positioning and narrative, as well as a shift in focus from a platform as an ecosystem towards a lens that takes into account the (infra)structural consequences of a platform as part of an ecosystem of services. In the second and third case study, I oblige to this conclusion and examine Gab as part of the platform ecosystem, shifting the analytical lens to the power dynamics and infrastructures of the platformized public sphere. There, I conclude that deplatformization demonstrates how the power and influence of private technology platforms reaches far beyond their own boundaries, which reveals platform power as infrastructural and rule-setting power. In the conclusion chapter, I argue that the aforementioned fringe lens is useful, not only for the analysis of fringe platforms, but also for the platformized public sphere as a whole, as it makes the structures and infrastructures of the platformized public sphere visible; highlights power and discourse; focuses on dynamics, conflict and breakdown; and incorporates the dominant and democratically productive as well as the marginal and illiberal, in its analyses.
show less
