Digital intimacy performed in celebrity voice tweets: forging authenticity amid context collapse

References

• Anaz, N. 2014. “Geopolitics of Film: Surveying Audience Reception of a Turkish Film, Valley of the Wolves: Palestine.” Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studie 11 (1): 5–30.
   Google Scholar
• Androutsopoulos, J. 2014. “Languaging When Contexts Collapse: Audience Design in Social Networking.” Discourse, Context & Media 4–5:62–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2014.08.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Androutsopoulos, J. 2015. “Negotiating Authenticities in Mediatized Times.” Discourse, Context & Media 8:74–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2015.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banet-Weiser, S. 2012. Authentic^TM: The Politics of Ambivalence in a Brand Culture. New York and London: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baym, N. K. 2014. “The Perils and Pleasures of Tweeting with Fans.” In Twitter and Society, edited by K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, and C. Puschmann, 221–236. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, A. 1984. “Language Style as Audience Design.” Language in Society 13 (2): 145–204. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001037X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, B. J. 2016. “Following Your ‘Friend’: Social Media and the Strength of Adolescents’ Parasocial Relationships with Media Personae.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 19 (11): 656–660. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• boyd, d. 2008. “Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics.” PhD Dissertation, University of California Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• boyd, D. 2011. “Social Network Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications.” In A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites, edited by Z. Papacharissi, 39–58. New York and Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, J., and N. K. Baym. 2020. Twitter: A Biography. In Journal of Materials Processing Technology. Vol. 1. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, B., and M. Hills. 2008. “Restricted Confessions? Blogging, Subcultural Celebrity and the Management of Producer–Fan Proximity.” Social Semiotics 18 (2): 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330802002424.
   Google Scholar
• Clough, P. T. 2010. “The Affective Turn: Political Economy, Biomedia, and Bodies.” In The Affect Theory Reader, edited by M. Gregg and G. J. Seigworth, 206–225. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, E. L., and W. J. Tyler. 2016. “Examining Perceived Distance and Personal Authenticity as Mediators of the Effects of Ghost-Tweeting on Parasocial Interaction.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 19 (5): 342–346. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coupland, N. 2003. “Sociolinguistic Authenticities.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (3): 417–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford, K. 2009. “These Foolish Things: On Intimacy and Insignifi Cance in Mobile Media.” In Mobile Technologies: From Telecommunications to Media, edited by G. Goggin and L. Hjorth, 252–265. New York and Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, P. 2003. “An Elephant in the Room.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (3): 392–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frobenius, M. 2014. “Audience Design in Monologues: How Vloggers Involve Their Viewers.” Journal of Pragmatics 72:59–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerlitz, C., and A. Helmond. 2013. “The Like Economy: Social Buttons and the Data-Intensive Web.” New Media and Society 15 (8): 1348–1365. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812472322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, D., and R. R. Wohl. 1956. “Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a Distance.” Psychiatry 19 (3): 215–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, C. 2011. “Communication in Online Fan Communities: The Ethics of Intimate Strangers.” Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication 2 (2): 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1386/ejpc.2.2.279_1.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, H. 2006. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York and London: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, H., R. Purushotma, M. Weigel, K. Clinton, and A. J. Robison. 2009. Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kehrberg, A. K. 2015. “‘I Love You, Please Notice Me’: The Hierarchical Rhetoric of Twitter Fandom.” Celebrity Studies 6 (1): 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/19392397.2015.995472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E., and d. boyd. 2011a. “I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience.” New Media & Society 13 (1): 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E., and d. boyd. 2011b. “To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter.” Convergence 17 (2): 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856510394539.
   Google Scholar
• Murthy, D. 2018. What is Twitter? Twitter: Social Communication in the Twitter Age. 2nd ed. Cambridge and Medford: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Musically. 2012. “Twitter Reminds Musicians Why They Should Be Tweeting.” https://musically.com/2012/03/16/twitter-reminds-musicians-why-they-should-be-tweeting/.
   Google Scholar
• Page, R. 2014. “Hoaxes, Hacking and Humour: Analysing Impersonated Identity on Social Network Sites.” In The Language of Social Media: Identity and Community on the Internet, editer by P. Seargeant and C. Tagg, 46–64. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, M., and R. Bourgoin. 2020. “Your Tweet, Your Voice.“ https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/product/2020/your-tweet-your-voice.
   Google Scholar
• Petersen, A. H. 2009. “‘We’re Making Our Own Paparazzi’: Twitter and the Construction of Star Atuehticity.” Flow 9 (14). https://www.flowjournal.org/2009/05/were-making-our-own-paparazzi-twitter-and-the-construction-of-star-authenticity-anne-helen-petersen-university-of-texas-austin/.
   Google Scholar
• Tagg, C. 2015. Exploring Digital Communication: Language in Action. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Tagg, C., and P. Seargeant. 2014. “Audience Design and Language Choice in the Construction and Maintenance of Translocal Communities on Social Network Sites.” In The Language of Social Media: Identity and Community on the Internet, edited by P. Seargeant and C. Tagg, 161–185. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. 2008. “Brave New World of Digital Intimacy.” The New York Times Magazine.
   Google Scholar
• Thrift, N. 2010. “Understanding the Material Practices of Glamour.” In The Affect Theory Reader, edited by M. Gregg and G. J. Seigworth, 289–308. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tolson, A. 2010. “A New Authenticity? Communicative Practices on YouTube.” Critical Discourse Studies 7 (4): 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2010.511834.
   Google Scholar
• Tsay-Vogel, M., and M. L. Schwartz. 2014. “Theorizing Parasocial Interactions Based on Authenticity: The Development of a Media Figure Classification Scheme.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 3 (2): 66–78.
   Google Scholar
• Yahoo News. 2012. “Twitter Creates New Section for Musicians and Fans.” https://news.yahoo.com/news/twitter-creates-section-musicians-fans-045827024.html.
   Google Scholar
• Zappavigna, M. 2017. “Twitter.” In Pragmatics of Social Media, edited by C. R. Hoffmann and W. Bublitz, 201–224. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
   Google Scholar