The Media End
Abstract
What is the prospect of disconnection – of a media end – in a digital memory culture that one-sidedly celebrates the virtues of non-stop connectivity, limitless perpetuation and endless recording? Is any form of closure whatsoever conceivable when technologies afford practices that allow for unprecedented continuing bonds with the dead online? Meditating existentially on the human givens of endings and closure – and their place or displacement in media theory and culture – poised against the horizons of ‘forever’ as these manifest themselves within our contemporary digital ecology, this chapter attends to the digital inheritance area, and to forms of digital eternity currently in circulation, as well as a few services for ending media life. With a particular focus on agency, as a troubled yet imperative piece of the contemporary digital and existential puzzle, it argues that techno-existential closure seems both repressed and incited somehow by the emergence of the digital afterlife.
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?
The digital afterlife industry became firmly established in the 2010s.
“The so called ' digital afterlife industry ' (Bassett 2022; Kasket 2019; Lagerkvist 2017; Öhman and Floridi 2018; Sisto 2020; W.H. Wong 2023) became firmly established in the 2010s.”
From AI and memory (2024) · cites this paper as Lagerkvist 2017
Deadbot services are often marketed as offering total memory and the idea of an eternal you.
“These services are often marketed as offering a kind of total memory and the idea of an eternal you (Lagerkvist 2017).”
From AI and memory (2024) · cites this paper as Lagerkvist 2017
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hoskins, A. (2024) · Memory, Mind & Media · doi:10.1017/mem.2024.16 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Memory in the margins: The connecting and colliding of vernacular war memories
de Smale, S. (2019) · Media, War & Conflict · doi:10.1177/1750635219828772 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Dinneen, J. D., Krtalić, M., Davoudi, N., Hellmich, H., Ochsner, C., & Bressel, P. (2023) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.24861 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.001.0001 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Involuntary childlessness online: Digital lifelines through blogs and Instagram
Stenström, K. (2020) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820968907 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
da Silva, A. L. M., & Araújo, W. F. (2019) · Journal of AESTHETICS & CULTURE · doi:10.1080/20004214.2019.1644130 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Virtually Part of the Family: The Last Goodbye and Digital Holocaust Witnessing
Marrison, K. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-83496-8_2 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Abejas, A. G., Santos, D. G., Mota‐Filipe, H., & Vergès, À. S. (2025) · Palliative & Supportive Care · doi:10.1017/s1478951525100990 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Tudor, M. (2022) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448221109801 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Critical incidents in everyday technology use: exploring digital breakdowns
Skågeby, J. (2018) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s00779-018-1184-8 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Memory and Mimesis in Our Relationships With Posthumous Avatars
Cholbi, M. (2025) · doi:10.1093/9780198945215.003.0065 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Remembrance practices in the 21st century
Berenson, A., & Ezra, I. (2023) · Narrative Inquiry · doi:10.1075/ni.22102.ber · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Entering Dimensions in Testimony
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0002 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0003
The Topography of Terror and Resistance to the Virtual
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0007
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0005
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0001
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.002.0003
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0008
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0006
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.002.0004
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.003.0004
Boswell, M., & Rowland, A. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197645390.002.0007
- Authors
- Lagerkvist, A.
- Corresponding author
- Lagerkvist, Amanda
- ORCID
- Lagerkvist, Amanda
- Venue
- Digital Memory Studies
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2017-09-27
- Pages
- 48-84
- OpenAlex
- W2785127698
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 8.31
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
- Keywords
- digital afterlife, digital inheritance, closure, agency, online memorials, digital permanence
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