‘Snapchat’, youth subjectivities and sexuality: disappearing media and the discourse of youth innocence
Open accessAbstract
Research on youth subjectivities and disappearing media is still in its infancy. Ephemeral technologies such as Snapchat, Frankly and Wickr offer young people opportunities for discursive agency, harnessing teenage discourses of social positioning. These media facilitate social mobility in teen peer contexts by providing a medium for dynamic and shifting relationships. The transmission of digital images can enable a social flexibility that has a significant impact on youth subjectivities where discursively constructed relational identities are brokered through cyber technologies. We tackle the question ‘what discourses are evoked and produced in the discussion of disappearing social media?’ by exploring two parents’ accounts of their children’s use of this media. We also examine a discourse of innocence that surrounds teens’ use of social media and, in particular, ephemeral applications, by sexting and cyberbullying. We engage in the debate on the use of ephemeral social media to consider the discourses influencing youth subjectivities and the nature of networked publics.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Snapping is non-consensual from the outset and ephemerality limits reporting.
“Snapping is a practice of taking a quick snap and sending it and is non-consensual from the outset, and the ephemerality of disappearing media limits capacities for reporting (Charteris et al., 2018; Handyside & Ringrose, 2017).”
From Teen Girls’ Experiences Negotiating the Ubiquitous Dick Pic: Sexual Double Standards and the Normalization of Image Based Sexual Harassment (2021) · cites this paper as Charteris et al., 2018
The Introduction describes capturing and temporarily sharing images, and Cyber-harassment says the evasive nature of ephemeral media makes harassment harder for outsiders to detect. The paper discusses particular images disseminated without consent, but does not say that snapping is non-consensual from the outset or explicitly that ephemerality limits reporting. The indexed passages provide no page numbers for these sections. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 48
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Buckingham, D. (2008). Youth, identity, and digital media. In D. Buckingham (ed.) The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning (vii-ix). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.001 · DOI
- Charteris, J., Gregory, S., & Masters, Y. (2014). Snapchat 'selfies': The case of disappearing data. In B. Hegarty, J. McDonald, & S.-K. Loke (Eds.), Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Proceedings ascilite Dunedin 2014 (pp. 389-393).
- Cox, C. (2014). Protecting victims of cyberstalking, cyberharassment, and online impersonation through prosecutions and effective laws. Jurimetrics, 54(3), 277- 302.
- Foucault, M. (2000). Truth and juridical forms. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power (pp. 1-89). New York: The New Press.
- Jackson, A.Y., & Mazzei, L. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Using epistemological frameworks in the production of meaning. London, UK: Routledge.
- Messitt, M. (2014). Cyberbullying happens in code. Break it. The Education Digest, 79 (9), 51-54.
- Robinson, K. (2008). In the name of 'childhood innocence': A discursive exploration of the Moral Panic Associated with Childhood and Sexuality. Cultural Studies Review, 14(2), 113-129. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/csr.v14i2.2075 · DOI
- Authors
- Charteris, J., Gregory, S., & Masters, Y.
- Affiliations
- University of New England (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Charteris, Jennifer
- Venue
- Gender and Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-05-23
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 205-221
- ISSN
- 0954-0253 (ISSN-L)
- 1360-0516
- OpenAlex
- W2406437317
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 7.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Gender and Education (publishedVersion)
- RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Youth Culture and Social Dynamics
- Keywords
- Snapchat, ephemeral media, youth subjectivity, youth sexuality, sexting, cyberbullying, discursive agency, relational identity, networked publics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
