Information Technology & Tourism

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 391–412 | Cite as

The social media tourist gaze: social media photography and its disruption at the zoo

  • Michael James WalshEmail author
  • Raechel Johns
  • Naomi F. Dale
Original Research


This article presents an account of the social media tourist gaze. It does this by reporting on a qualitative exploratory study that considers the use of photography and its dissemination on social media while participants stayed overnight at a zoological park. To examine the impact of photography and social media, our study separated participants into two groups: those we asked to refrain from posting on social media and those whom we placed no restrictions on while undertaking this overnight tourist experience. Results indicate that participants experienced heightened levels of connection with tourist activities and increased interactions between participants who were refraining from social media use. But participants also indicate some consternation and difficulty associated with social media abstention. Our contribution provides an understanding of the impact of the social media tourist gaze which suggests that photography has become a critical instrument for sharing experiences within tourism contexts. Tension appears ever present between a need to capture tourist experiences for digital dissemination on the one hand, and engage in the tourist activity itself, which suggest that tourist contexts and providers may need to explore better ways to manage both face-to-face and digital involvements that travellers increasingly feel compelled to perform.


Gaze Ontological security Photography Social media Tourism Zoo 



Funding was provided by MDB Futures.


  1. Baker SA, Walsh MJ (2018) ‘Good Morning Fitfam’: top posts, hashtags and gender display on Instagram. New Media Soc 20(12):4553–4570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell C, Lyall J (2005) ‘‘I was here”: pixilated evidence. In: Crouch D, Jackson R, Thompson F (eds) The media and the tourist imagination: converging cultures. Routledge, London, pp 135–142Google Scholar
  3. Cetina Karin (2009) The synthetic situation: interactionism for a global world. Symb Interact 32(1):61–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dinhopl A, Gretzel U (2016) Selfie-taking as touristic looking. Ann Tour Res 57:126–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dworkin SL (2012) Sample size policy for qualitative studies using in-depth interviews. Arch Sex Behav 41(6):1319–1320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edensor T (2000) Staging tourism: tourists as performers. Ann Tour Res 27(2):322–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fawcett C, Cormack P (2001) Guarding authenticity at literary tourism sites. Ann Tour Res 28(3):686–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flaherty G, Smith M (2019) Taking the edge out of high-risk selfies in adventure tourists. Wilderness Environ Med 30(2):218–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Franklin Adrian (1999) Animals and modern culture. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Germann Molz J (2012) Travel connections: tourism, technology and togetherness in a mobile world. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Giddens A (1990) The consequences of modernity. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Goffman E (1959) The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Goffman E (1963) Behaviour in public places: notes on the social organization of gatherings. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Goffman E (1971) Relations in public: microstudies of the public order. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Goffman E (1979) Gender advertisements. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Hand M (2012) Ubiquitous photography. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Jenkins R (2010) The 21st century interaction order. In: Jacobsen M (ed) The contemporary Goffman. Routledge, New York, pp 257–274Google Scholar
  18. Lalicic L, Weismayer C (2016) The passionate use of mobiles phones among tourists. Inf Technol Tour 16:153–173. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Larsen J (2005) Families seen sightseeing: performativity of tourist photography. Space Cult 8(4):416–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Larsen J (2010) Goffman and the tourist gaze: a performative perspective on tourism mobilities. In: Jacobsen M (ed) The contemporary Goffman. Routledge, New York, pp 312–332Google Scholar
  21. Larsen J, Meged JW (2013) Tourists co-producing guided tours. Scand J Hosp Tour 13(2):88–102. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Larsen J, Svabo C (2014) The tourist gaze and “Family Treasure Trails” in museums. Tour Stud 14(2):105–125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Larsen J, Urry J, Axhausen KW (2007) Networks and tourism: mobile social life. Ann Tour Res 34(1):244–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ling R (2008) New tech, new ties: how mobile communication is reshaping social cohesion. MIT Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ling R (2012) Taken for grantedness: The embedding of mobile communication into society. MIT Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ling R (2016) Soft coercion: reciprocal expectations of availability in the use of mobile communication. First Monday 21(9):5. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lo IS, McKercher B (2015) Ideal image in process: online tourist photography and impression management. Ann Tour Res 52:104–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lyu SO (2016) Travel selfies on social media as objectified self-presentation. Tour Manag 54:185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marwick A (2013) Status update: celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  30. Misra S, Cheng L, Genevie J, Yuan M (2016) The iPhone effect: the quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environ Behav 48(2):275–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pearce P, Moscardo G (1986) The concept of authenticity in tourist experiences. Aust N Z J Sociol 22:121–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pearce J, Moscardo G (2015) Social representations of tourist selfies: new challenges for sustainable tourism. BESTEN Think Tank XV, The Environment-People Nexus in sustainable tourism: finding the balance. Accessed 3 Oct 2018
  33. Pinch T (2010) The invisible technologies of Goffman’s sociology from the Merry-Go-Round to the internet. Technol Cult 51(2):409–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rickly-Boyd JM (2012) Authenticity and aura: a benjaminian approach to tourism. Ann Tour Res 39(1):269–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Robinson P (2012) The e-mediated (Google Earth) gaze: an observational and semiotic perspective. Curr Issues Tour 15(4):353–367. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Robinson P (2014) Emediating the tourist gaze: memory, emotion and choreography of the digital photograph. Inf Technol Tour 14:177–196. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Scarles C (2009) Becoming tourist: renegotiating the visual in tourist experience. Environ Plan Soc Space 27(3):465–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Scarles C (2012) The photographed other: interplays of agency in tourist photography in Cusco, Peru. Ann Tour Res 39(2):928–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Scarles CE (2013) The ethics of tourist photography. Environ Plan Soc Space 31(5):897–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schroeder J (2002) Visual consumption. Routledge, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sontag S (1977) On photography. Penguin Book, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Stylianou-Lambert T (2012) Tourists with cameras: reproducing or producing? Ann Tour Res 39(4):1817–1838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Turkle S (2008) Always-on/always-on-you: the tethered self. In: Katz J (ed) Handbook of mobile communication studies. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 121–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Urry J (1992) The tourist gaze revisited. Am Behav Sci 36(2):172–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Urry J (1995) Consuming places. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Urry J (2002) The tourist gaze, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Urry J, Larsen J (2011) The tourist gaze 3.0. Sage, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. van Dijck J (2008) Digital photography: communication, identity, memory. Vis Commun 7(1):57–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. van Dijck J (2013) You have one identity: performing the self on Facebook and LinkedIn. Media Cult Soc 35(2):199–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. van House NA, Davis M, Takhteyev Y, Ames M, Finn M (2004) The social uses of personal photography: methods of projecting future imaging applications. Accessed 3 Oct 2018
  51. Waller V, Farquharson F, Dempsey D (2015) Qualitative social research: contemporary methods for the digital age. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  52. Walsh MJ, Baker SA (2017) The selfie and the transformation of the public–private distinction. Inf Commun Soc 20(8):1185–1203. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Walsh MJ, Clark SJ (2019) Co-present conversations as “socialized trance”: talk, involvement obligations, smart-phone disruption. Symb Interact 42(1):6–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zappavigna M (2016) Social media photography: construing subjectivity in instagram images. Vis Commun 15(3):271–292. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhou B (2019) Fear of missing out, feeling of acceleration, and being permanently online: a survey study of university students’ use of mobile apps in China. Chin J Commun 12(1):66–83. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Business, Government and LawUniversity of CanberraBruceAustralia

Personalised recommendations