Social Media for Social Good or Evil: An Introduction
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
In the heyday of social media, individuals around the world held high hopes for the democratizing force of social media; however, in light of the recent public outcry of privacy violations, fake news, and Russian troll farms, much of optimism toward social media has waned in favor of skepticism, fear, and outrage. This special issue critically explores the question, “Is social media for good or evil?” While good and evil are both moral terms, the research addresses whether the benefits of using social media in society outweigh the drawbacks. To help conceptualize this topic, we examine some of the benefits (good) and drawbacks (evil) of using social media as discussed in eight papers from the 2017 International Conference on Social Media and Society. This thematic collection reflects a broad range of topics, using diverse methods, from authors around the world and highlights different ways that social media is used for good, or evil, or both. We conclude that the determination of good and evil depends on where you stand, but as researchers, we need to go a step further to understand who it is good for and who it might hurt.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Research repeatedly indicates that people derive tremendous benefits from being on social media.
“At the same time, it is important to recognize that research repeatedly indicates that people derive tremendous benefits from being on social media (Quan-Haase & Young, 2010;Hemsley, Jacobson, Gruzd, & Mai, 2018).”
From Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: Perspectives and research propositions (2021) · cites this paper as Hemsley, Jacobson, Gruzd, & Mai, 2018
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 10 · Cited by 64
- Authors
- Hemsley, J., Jacobson, J., Gruzd, A., & Mai, P.
- Affiliations
- Syracuse University (US)
- Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Hemsley, Jeff
- Venue
- Social Media + Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-07
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 2056-3051 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2883134502
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 12.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Social Media + Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Syracuse University
- Canada Research Chairs
- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
- Keywords
- social media, democratization, privacy violations, fake news, social media and society
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