Advertisement

Russian New Media Users’ Reaction to a Meteor Explosion in Chelyabinsk: Twitter Versus YouTube

  • Natalia Rulyova
Chapter

Abstract

The author analyzes how Russian-language social media users reacted to the 2013 Chelyabinsk meteor shower. Drawing on Kress’s social semiotic approach, the author presents a multimodal analysis of media uploaded to the Internet by users showing their reactions to the event, and demonstrates how new media users employ familiar primary and secondary speech genres to shape their reactions. This comparative analysis of videos and tweets helps conceptualize differences between primary and secondary speech genres by distinguishing the genres which are employed to communicate the event directly (primary) and the genres that are employed to engage with the discourse about the event (secondary). The author also explores how technological devices become associated with particular genres and how global genres become domesticated to culturally specific contexts.

Keywords

Technological Device News Item Meteor Shower News Agency Speech Utterance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alexanyan, K. 2009. From comrades to classmates: Social networks on the Russian internet. Digital Icons: Studies in Russian, Eurasian and Central European New Media 1: 1–12.Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, M. 1986. Speech genres and other late essays, Trans: Vern W. McGee, ed. Emerson, C. and Holquist, M.). Austin: University of Texas.Google Scholar
  3. Dreizin, F., and T. Priestley. 1982. A systematic approach to Russian obscene language. Russian Linguistics 6(2): 233–249.Google Scholar
  4. Eggins, S., and D. Slade. 1997. Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  5. Fossato, F., and J. Lloyd. 2008. The web that failed: How opposition politics and independent initiatives are failing on the internet in Russia. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.Google Scholar
  6. Gladarev, B., and M. Lonkila. 2012. The role of social networking sites in civic activism in Russia and Finland. The Europe–Asia Studies 64(8): 1375–1394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goodfellow, C. 2013. Don’t lose your grip on reality: Western videogames, worried politicians, and how Russian gamers push back against media stereotypes. Paper presented at Nordic Youth Research Symposium, Tallinn, Estonia, June 12–14.Google Scholar
  8. Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  9. Kramer, A. 2013. Russians Wade into the snow to seek treasure from the Sky. The New York Times, February 18. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/world/europe/russian-scientists-say-they-found-meteorite-fragments.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0. Accessed 23 Feb 23 2016.
  10. Kress, G. 2010. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to communication. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  11. Latonero, M., and I. Shklovski. 2011. Emergency management, Twitter, and social media evangelism. International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management 3(4): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mackey, R., and G. Mullany. 2013. Spectacular videos of meteor over Siberia. New York Times, February 15. http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/15/video-captures-flaming-object-believed-to-be-meteorite/?_r=0. Accessed 23 Feb 23 2016.
  13. Majchrzak, A., S.L. Jarvenpaa, and A.B. Hollingshead. 2007. Coordinating expertise among emergent groups responding to disasters. Organization Science 18(1): 147–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Miller, C.R. 1984. Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Morris, J. 2012. Learning how to shoot fish on the internet: New media in the Russian margins as facilitating immediate and parochial social needs. The Europe–Asia Studies 64(8): 1546–1564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nikiporets-Takigawa, G. 2013. Tweeting the Russian protests. Digital Icons: Studies in Russian, Eurasian and Central European New Media 9: 1–25.Google Scholar
  17. Palen, L., S. Vieweg, S. Liu, and A. Hughes. 2009. Crisis in a networked world: Features of computer-mediated communication in April 16, 2007. Social Science Computer Review 27(4): 467–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rohozinski, R. 1999. Mapping Russian cyberspace: Perspective on democracy and the Net. UNRISD Discussion Paper 115. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc. Accessed 23 Feb 2016.
  19. Rulyova, N. 2007. Subversive glocalisation in the game show pole chudes (The field of miracles). Europe–Asia Studies 59(8): 1367–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rulyova, N., and T. Zagibalov. 2012. Blogging the other: Representation of the Chinese and Russians in the blogosphere. Europe–Asia Studies 64(8): 1524–1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sandford, D. 2013. Meteorites injure hundreds in central Russia. BBC, February 15. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21468116.
  22. Scaffidi, C., B. Myers, and M. Shaw. 2007. Trial by water: Creating hurricane Katrina “person locator” web sites. In Leadership at a distance: Research in technologically-supported work, ed. S. Weisband, 209–222. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, S.A. 1998. The social meanings of swearing: Workers and bad language in late imperial and early soviet Russia. The Past and Present Society 160(August): 167–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Suleymanova, D. 2009. Tatar groups in Vkontakte: The interplay between ethnic and virtual identities on social networking sites. Digital icons: Studies in Russian, Eurasian and Central European New Media 1(2): 37–55. http://www.digitalicons.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Dilyara-Suleymanova-DI-2.4.pdf. Accessed 23 Feb 2016.
  25. van de Ven, J., R. van Rijk, P. Essens, and E. Frinking. 2008. Network centric operations in crisis management. In Proceedings of the Fifth international conference on information systems for crisis response and management, eds. F. Fiedrich and B. Van de Walle, 764–773. Washington, DC. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.165.8455&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed 5 Oct. 2016.
  26. van Leeuwen, Theo. 2008. Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. White, C. 2011. Social media, crisis communications and emergency management: Leveraging web 2.0 technology. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. White, C., L. Plotnick, J. Kushma, S. Hiltz, and M. Turoff. 2009. An online social network for emergency management. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on information systems for crisis response and management, ed. J. Landgren and S. Jul, Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
  29. Zappavigna, M. 2012. Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the web. London/New York: Continuum Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalia Rulyova
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Modern LanguagesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations