I will be at the poster session for the Social Media & Society International Conference (September 27-28, Toronto)

Title: Sharing online videos for deeper interaction among friends


Background: The phenomenon of sharing content on social network sites has been widely explored in communication and Internet studies. Many authors recognize the importance of social connections between individuals, but they do not explain why and how users share content (Haridakis & Hanson, 2009; Jenkins, Ford, Green, & Green, 2012). Moreover, since these social connections are made visible by social media platforms, specific topics have been studied by such as: impression management and self-presentation (boyd & Ellison, 2007), issues of disclosing personal information, building and maintaining network (Caers et al., 2013).

Objective: However, maintaining one’s network, especially friendship, can be done in a less visible manner on social network sites. This paper analyses how sharing online videos is used to build and maintain friendship bonds between young adults.

Videos are an unavoidable Internet phenomenon (Purcell, 2010). Videos move from one site to another, from computer to phone, they are spread through word of mouth, and broadcast on television. Distributing a link to a video clip is often called sharing, users are enthusiastic about sharing audiovisual content (Cesar et al., 2008) ,and the numbers of shares ─ of online adults who watch videos on video-sharing sites ─ has nearly doubled since 2006 (Madden, 2009). Since sharing is at the heart of social media sites, there is a strong link between watching online videos and interpersonal communication (Oumard, Mirza, Kroy, & Chorianopoulos, 2008).

Methods: The data used in this paper are from semi-structured and open interviews. I proceed by conducting three interviews per participant, allowing the construction of a dialogue. During the first interview, I asked participants to simply describe their everyday experiences related to online videos. A second interview allowed me to elaborate on some details. The last meeting was directly inspired by the notion of reflective practices (Finlay, 2002), as researcher and participant discussed the initial interpretations and the research process.

Results: Far from being simply a vehicle for self-presentation, participants only share publically videos that will be of interest to everybody. Most of the time, they share online video to specific friends according to specific events or contexts. This paper illustrates how users express emotion, how sharing a video is a form of paying attention to others, how information, feelings or personal experiences can be shared through a YouTube link. It goes on to argue that video serves as a complementary channel of communication ─ sometimes the only one, sometimes as a reinforcement for a conversation ─ blurring even more the already fading boundary between online and offline interaction.

Conclusions: The paper concludes by suggesting that current research needs to go beyond examining what is visible on social network sites in order to understand how sharing communicates something about relationships between people.


Bondad-Brown, B., Rice, R., & Pearce, K. E. (2011). A Uses and Gratifications and Social Media Approach to Understanding Online Video Use and Content Recommendations. Paper presented at the ICA, Boston.

boyd, d., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.

Caers, R., Feyter, T. D., Couck, M. D., Stough, T., Vigna, C., & Bois, C. D. (2013). Facebook: A literature review. New Media & Society, 15(6), 982-1002.

Cesar, P., Bulterman, D. C. A., Geerts, D., Jansen, J., Knoche, H., & Seager, W. (2008). Enhancing social sharing of videos: fragment, annotate, enrich, and share Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Multimedia (pp. 11–20). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

Haridakis, P., & Hanson, G. (2009). Social Interaction and Co-Viewing With YouTube: Blending Mass Communication Reception and Social Connection. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 317-335.

Jenkins, H., Ford, S., Green, J., & Green, J. B. (2012). Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning in a networked culture: NYU Press.

Madden, M., Project, P. I., & American, L. (2009). The audience for online video-sharing sites shoots up. Pew Internet & American Life Project.

Oumard, M., Mirza, D., Kroy, J., & Chorianopoulos, K. (2008). A cultural probes study on video sharing and social communication on the internet Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (pp. 142–148 ). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

Purcell, K. (2010). The state of online video: Pew Internet & American Life Project.


using index

Book index can be a great way to see what the author thinks about a specific subject. You can see the important theories, concepts, key authors…
Since I have no memory, bur still wants to quickly see what was really important in a book, I make little mind map of a concept.

For example with Al-Deen, H. S. N., & Hendricks, J. A. (2012). Social media : usage and impact. New York, NY: Lexington Books.

index of social media in (Al-Deen, 2012)

index of social media in (Al-Deen, 2012)

I have an image of this in my endnote, so if I need to refresh my memory, I can just look at it. It is also useful for the lit review. That book was centered around education, strategic communication and legal issues. So it’s not the place for me to look for information about social media and relationship maintenance. So 5minutes wasted doing the mindmap, can save me time later on when I have to go back and search in all of my references for something specific.

Partager pour s’exprimer

Le jeudi 20 mars 2014 j’ai présenté au colloque interuniversitaire de l’AEMDC (l’Association des étudiants (es) à la maîtrise et au doctorat en communication de l’UQAM) J’étais dans le panel sur la présentation de soi.

Voici un résumé de ma présentation sur le partage de vidéo comme moyen d’expression: Depuis l’apparition du Web 2.0, beaucoup d’attention a été portée sur les notions telles que la présentation de soi, la surveillance et le voyeurisme, mais je suggère que d’autres aspects seraient profitables à explorer comme celle du partage. Cette communication invite à s’intéresser aux pratiques communicationnelles des internautes à travers le partage de vidéo en ligne. En effet, en 2013, 78 % des internautes regardent ou téléchargent des vidéos en ligne (Purcell, 2013). En 2011, 500 tweets publiés par minute contenaient un lien YouTube, et plus de 150 ans vidéo YouTube ont été visionnés sur Facebook chaque jour (Li, Wang, Liu, & Xu, 2012).

Le partage de lien YouTube sur Twitter et Facebook

Le partage de lien YouTube sur Twitter et Facebook

Qu’est-ce qui motive les internautes à autant partager des vidéos en ligne ?

Concernant les réseaux sociaux numériques, beaucoup de gens partagent des vidéos pour vanter leur accomplissement de découverte ou recommander un contenu (Bondad-Brown, Rice, & Pearce, 2012). Cette communication montrera que d’autres motivations existent. Nous verrons comment le partage de vidéos s’imbrique dans une danse complexe entre contenus, individus et contextes à travers des exemples d’internautes exprimant émotion, idée, et argument. Plus précisément, nous explorons comment le partage de vidéo est plus qu’une présentation de soi ou une recommandation, mais une forme d’ouverture aux autres.

  • Les internautes partagent des vidéos en ligne pour exprimer

Leurs goûts
Leur valeurs
Leurs émotions

  • Les internautes veulent partager l’émotion ressentie par le visionnement de la vidéo :

 Je pense qu’’il attendait la même réaction, un genre de ah ! » (Nathalie, 3e entrevue).

  • Les internautes utlisent les vidéos en ligne pour s’exprimer au-delà des mots

On a eu une discussion avec des mots beaucoup plus simple, mais j’ai saisi qu’il avait compris ce que je voulais dire, parce qu’on avait la même façon de s’expliquer les choses. Oui, c’est poétique. C’est très beau.  (Sandrine, 3e entrevue)


Quelques motivations à partager



Let’s talk about blog : Minor forms of academic communication

At the WSSF, I assisted at one really interesting panel on blogging 

Loïc Le Pape  described the creation of a blog on the Hypotheses platform in relation to his position as a “young academic” and drawing on his experience of academic blogging.

Andre Gunthert made an important point about why scholar blog. It is for conversation, a need to discuss ideas. Even when there are no comments on his blog, he still talk about it with colleagues, making them “silent conversation”.

Marin Dacos presented his view on the lack of digital infrastructures in social science. Just because things are virtual does not mean it is totally immaterial.

Arthur Charpentier explained how his blog provided the opportunity to publish research studies in an unconventional form. This enables journalist to read about his research and actually understand it.  Maybe blogging can revamp the relationship between science and society, simply by making research more comprehensible to others.I know that I wont be able to read his statistical papers, because it is not in my field. Blogging is also a good way for academics to get to know other disciplines

WSSF 2013

This October will be held the WORLD SOCIAL SCIENCE FORUM in Montreal.

source :

Scholars from all over the world and across disciplines will address the ways in which digital technologies are being developed and used, and how they are transforming different spheres of social life and social sciences. I will be part of one exciting panel on the engagement of  ordinary user in science.

Participatory Science on the Web : The Re-enchantment of Science by Online Collectives

The participatory Web (Web 2.0) enables and encourages ordinary citizens to participate in developing and sharing content online. In the sciences, new connections between amateurs and scientists are stimulating public interest in science. They are also changing the way scientific knowledge is produced in some fields. By examining four cases in the natural sciences, this panel proposes an examination of the rearticulation of relationships between amateurs and scientists and the role of Web platforms in providing providing spaces where different registers of knowledge co-exist. Our cases clearly illustrate the contribution of amateurs to producing, not only data for analysis by scientists, but also in shaping research questions and directions. This line of questioning is a specific examination within the larger field of the ways in which digital tools are profoundly transforming the scientific knowledge production process. The presentations in our interdisciplinary panel will examine these new partnerships in the fields of climate research, biomolecular research, botany and ecology from the perspectives of both scientists and amateur contributors.

Coordinator: Dr. Lorna Heaton
Organization/Institution: Université de Montréal
Schedule: Monday, October 14, 2013 – 09:00 – 10:45
Room: 519AB

As part of this panel my colleagues (Lorna Heaton,Xiao Liu,Florence Millerand ) and I will present a paper on the Changing Naturalist Practices: Engagement Around a Giant Grasshopper at ONEM

source : ONEM

We present a case study of a participatory science project that involved collecting observations of a giant grasshopper and registering them online. Using a qualitative and ethnographically informed approach, we identify a number of factors that enabled widespread participation in this naturalist inquiry, organized by Observatoire Naturaliste des Écosystèmes Méditerranéens (ONEM). Our findings illustrate how the association’s double goals of stimulating an appreciation for nature and increasing scientific knowledge of the species under investigation are articulated as both naturalists and the general public participate. We propose a hybrid model of participatory science, neither scientist-driven nor grassroots-based, which originates in a commitment to ideals of openly accessible and free access to data, a “data commons.” This case illustrates how even low-level participation (crowdsourcing type) can produce significant results – not only in terms of generating scientific knowledge, but also in increasing public engagement with science and scientific literacy.

source :ONEM

Dr. Jones: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the research process

As I am starting to prepare research statement, I was thinking why I started doing what I am doing. And I went way back, when I was a kid. I did not want to be a princess, way to boring.

image source:

I wanted to be an archeologist, going around the world, discovering new artefacts. Then, I got interested in film, since I was curious to know more about this mysterious power film can have on people. And in 2003, star war kids was seen on the internet. So I got interested in this smaller screen. And did a master on how short film can be distributed on the web. By then, I was hooked on research and technology and thinking differently and breaking new grounds. And so I think am cool just like Indiana, because doing research, traveling the world exchanging ideas and teaching young mind, is pretty cool. So when feeling done, think about why you started your PhD. Because deep down, under the complaining and teeth grinding, we like what we are doing. Well, I do anyway…

cluster analysis

I am writing the analysis section of my thesis. And I have to go back to the data. The other day and wanted to look at the coding in a different light, so I play around in Nvivo. I did a “nodes cluster by coding similarity”.

Cluster analysis is an exploratory technique that you can use to visualize patterns in your project by grouping sources or nodes that share similar words, similar attribute values, or are coded similarly by nodes. Cluster analysis diagrams provide a graphical representation of sources or nodes to make it easy to see similarities and differences. Sources or nodes in the cluster analysis diagram that appear close together are more similar than those that are far apart. A horizontal branching diagram where similar items are clustered together on the same branch and different items are further apart. Dendrograms can be useful for comparing pairs of items.

I discover that my 10 participants (they have a node as well) were paired with another nodes. And it describe in one word how they feel about online videos or how they use them. So, my coding is not too bad. Here is the list of the codes : aesthetic, nostalgia, mobility, concert, emotion, anchor, instructive, easiness, keyword, and pleasure. It just shows the range of reasons for sharing online videos.

I also take screen captures of the different things I do with Nvivo, keeping an archive of what I used and what I found to be useful. And this helps me thinks about the congruity between the methodology use, the  analysis, and the final writings. This is part of my strategy to be transparent in writing, to show where my conclusion is coming from. Because “transparency is necessary for accountability” (Bringer, 2004)




Bringer, J. D., Johnston, L. H., & Brackenridge, C. H. (2004). Maximizing Transparency in a Doctoral Thesis1: The Complexities of Writing About the Use of QSR*NVIVO Within a Grounded Theory Study. Qualitative Research, 4(2), 247-265.