Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 566

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 182 of the 182 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ethnographic Approaches to Digital Media

Coleman, E. Gabriella·2010·Annual Review of Anthropology
DOI 10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.104945
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This review surveys and divides the ethnographic corpus on digital media into three broad but overlapping categories: the cultural politics of digital media, the vernacular cultures of digital media, and the prosaics of digital media. Engaging these three categories of scholarship on digital media, I consider how ethnographers are exploring the complex relationships between the local practices and global implications of digital media, their materiality and politics, and their banal, as well as profound, presence in cultural life and modes of communication. I consider the way these media have become central to the articulation of cherished beliefs, ritual practices, and modes of being in the world; the fact that digital media culturally matters is undeniable but showing how, where, and why it matters is necessary to push against peculiarly narrow presumptions about the universality of digital experience.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.104945

Cites

182 of 182 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 182 references

Research works printed but not linked: 49

  1. Adams TL, 2008, Electronic Tribes: The Virtual Worlds of Geeks, Gamers, Shamans, and Scammers, 10.7560/717732 · doi:10.7560/717732
  2. Amrute SB. 2008. Producing mobility: Indian ITers in an interconnected world . PhD thesis. Univ. Chicago. 345 pp.
  3. Bowker GC. 2007. The past and the Internet. See Karaganis 2007, pp. 20–37 · doi:10.1016/s1353-4858(07)70106-x
  4. Boyer D., 2007, Understanding Media: A Popular Philosophy
  5. Brunton F. 2009. Spam in action: social technology and unintended consequences . PhD thesis. Univ. Aberdeen. 231 pp.
  6. Castells M., 1996, The Rise of the Network Society
  7. Castells M., 2009, Communication Power
  8. Chan AS. 2008b. Through fieldwork: slashdot.org. See Turkle 2008, pp. 125–37
  9. Christen K. 2009. Access and accountability: the ecology of information sharing in the digital age. Anthropol. News April:4–5 · doi:10.1111/j.1556-3502.2009.50404.x
  10. Cohen H, Salazar JF, eds. 2005. Digital anthropology. Media Int. Aust. 116:5–75 · doi:10.1177/1329878x0511600103
  11. Constable N., 2003, Romance on a Global Stage: Pen Pals, Virtual Ethnography, and “Mail-Order” Marriages, 10.1525/9780520937222 · doi:10.1525/9780520937222
  12. Cook SE. 2004. New technologies and language change: toward an anthropology of linguistic frontiers. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 33:103–15 · doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143921
  13. Crystal D., 2008, Txtng: The Gr8 Db8
  14. Downey G. 2001. Virtual webs, physical technologies, hidden workers: the spaces of labor in information internetworks. Tech. Cult. 42(2):209–35 · doi:10.1353/tech.2001.0058
  15. English-Leuck J., 2002, Cultures@SiliconValley
  16. Epstein SG., 2008, Handbook of Science and Technology Studie, 499
  17. Ess C, Kawabata A, Kurosaki H. 2007. Cross-cultural perspectives on religion and computer-mediated communication. J. Comput. Mediated Commun. 12(3):article 9, http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue3/ · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00357.x
  18. Fischer M., 1999, Critical Anthropology Now: Unexpected Context, Shifting Constituencies, Changing Agendas, 245
  19. Fuller C, Narasimhan H. 2007. Information technology professionals and the new-rich middle class in Chennai (Madras). Mod. Asian Stud. 41(1):121–50 · doi:10.1017/s0026749x05002325
  20. Fuller C, Narasimhan H. 2008. From landlords to software engineers: migration and urbanization among Tamil brahmans. Comp. Stud. Soc. Hist. 50(1):170–96 · doi:10.1017/s0010417508000091
  21. Gopinath S. 2005. Ringtones, or the auditory logic of globalization. First Monday 10(12): http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue10_12/gopinath/index.html · doi:10.5210/fm.v10i12.1295
  22. Hakken D., 1999, Cyborgs@Cyberspace? An Ethnographer Looks at the Future
  23. Horst AH, 2010, Anthropology and the Individual: A Material Culture Approach, 99
  24. Humphrey C. 2009. The mask and the face: imagination and social life in Russian chat rooms and beyond. Ethnos 74(1):31–50 · doi:10.1080/00141840902751154
  25. Humphreys L, Barker T. 2007. Modernity and the mobile phone: exploring tensions about dating and sex in Indonesia. J. Media Cult. 10(1): http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0703/06-humphreys-barker.php · doi:10.5204/mcj.2602
  26. 10.7551/mitpress/8402.001.0001 · doi:10.7551/mitpress/8402.001.0001
  27. 10.1215/9780822389750 · doi:10.1215/9780822389750
  28. Jones G, Schieffelin B. 2009a. Enquoting voices, accomplishing talk: uses of be + like in instant messaging. Lang. Commun. 29(1):77–113 · doi:10.1016/j.langcom.2007.09.003
  29. 10.1215/9780822389002 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Leach J. 2005. Modes of creativity and the register of ownership. See Ghosh 2005, pp. 29–44
  31. Ling R, 2009, Mobile Phones and Mobile Communication
  32. Milberry K., 2008, Reconstructing Biotechnologies: Critical Social Analyses, 327, 10.3920/9789086866397_018 · doi:10.3920/9789086866397_018
  33. Morozov E. 2009. How dictators watch us on the Web. Prospect. Vol. 165: http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2009/11/how-dictators-watch-us-on-the-web/
  34. Myers F. 2005. Some properties of culture and persons. See Ghosh 2005, pp. 45–60
  35. O'Donnell C. 2009. The everyday lives of video game developers: experimentally understanding underlying systems/structures. Transform. Works Cult. Vol. 2: http://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/article/view/73/76 · doi:10.3983/twc.2009.073
  36. Orgad S, 2005, Storytelling Online: Talking Breast Cancer on the Internet
  37. Pertierra R., 2006, Transforming Technologies: Altered Selves—Mobile Phones and Internet Use in the Philippines
  38. Radde-Antweiler K. 2008. Religion is becoming virtualized: introduction to the special issue on religion in virtual worlds. Heidelberg J. Rel. Internet , ed. K Radde-Antweiler, 3.1: http://online.uni-hd.de/ · doi:10.4324/9780203731420-1
  39. Russell A, 2010, The Anthropology of News and Journalism: Global Perspectives, 270
  40. Salazar JF. 2005. Digitising knowledge: anthropology and new practices of digitextuality. Media Int. Aust. 116:64–74 · doi:10.1177/1329878x0511600108
  41. Schull N. 2008. Video poker. See Turkle 2008, pp. 153–71
  42. Sennet R., 2008, The Craftsman
  43. Strathern M. 2005. Imagined collectivities and multiple authorship. See Ghosh 2005, pp. 13–28 · doi:10.1525/ae.2005.32.1.28
  44. Sundaram R. 2007. Other networks: media urbanism and the culture of the copy in South Asia. See Karaganis 2007, pp. 48–73
  45. Tawil-Souri H., 2009, Internationalizing Internet Studies: Beyond Anglophone Paradigms, 32
  46. Wallis C, 2008, Gender Digital Divide, 196
  47. Wallis C., 2010, Youth, Society, and Mobile Media in Asia, 57
  48. Zaloom C. 2006. Markets and machines: work in the technological sensoryscapes of finance. Am. Q. 58(3):815–37 · doi:10.1353/aq.2006.0072
  49. Zandbergen D., 2010, Religions of Modernity, 161

Cited by

See all 566

Metadata

Authors
Coleman, E. G.
Venue
Annual Review of Anthropology
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2010-10-21
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
487-505
ISSN
  • 0084-6570 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4290
DOI
10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.104945
OpenAlex
W2159745611
Cited by
566
References
182
FWCI
16.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ethnographic Approaches to Digital Media. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.104945
The paper
Coleman, E. G. (2010). Ethnographic Approaches to Digital Media. Annual Review of Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.104945

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.