Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups

This study highlights the challenges of computer-mediated communication for vulnerable individuals and groups, by studying boundary work in stigmatized communities online. Five stigmatized online communities with different affordances were studied: (1) “pro-ana” blogs; (2) an infertility discussion...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Daphna Yeshua-Katz, Ylva Hård af Segerstad
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2020-12-01
Series:Social Media + Society
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120984476
id doaj-03be0eb63ce34289a07a06840247619c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-03be0eb63ce34289a07a06840247619c2020-12-27T00:33:26ZengSAGE PublishingSocial Media + Society2056-30512020-12-01610.1177/2056305120984476Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support GroupsDaphna Yeshua-Katz0Ylva Hård af Segerstad1Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, IsraelUniversity of Gothenburg, SwedenThis study highlights the challenges of computer-mediated communication for vulnerable individuals and groups, by studying boundary work in stigmatized communities online. Five stigmatized online communities with different affordances were studied: (1) “pro-ana” blogs; (2) an infertility discussion board; (3) a Facebook group for bereaved parents; and (4) two WhatsApp groups for Israeli veterans of war with post-traumatic stress disorder. In-depth interviews with members and administrators ( n  = 66) revealed that social media affordances such as low anonymity and high visibility may marginalize those living with stigma. While research literature applauds social media for allowing the formation and maintenance of social capital, our study highlights the paradox caused by these very same affordances. To offer safe and functioning environments of support, the communities must guard against impostors whose presence threatens their safe havens. Simultaneously, this may make these groups inaccessible to those who truly need support and remove such groups from the public eye.https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120984476
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Daphna Yeshua-Katz
Ylva Hård af Segerstad
spellingShingle Daphna Yeshua-Katz
Ylva Hård af Segerstad
Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups
Social Media + Society
author_facet Daphna Yeshua-Katz
Ylva Hård af Segerstad
author_sort Daphna Yeshua-Katz
title Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups
title_short Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups
title_full Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups
title_fullStr Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups
title_full_unstemmed Catch 22: The Paradox of Social Media Affordances and Stigmatized Online Support Groups
title_sort catch 22: the paradox of social media affordances and stigmatized online support groups
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Social Media + Society
issn 2056-3051
publishDate 2020-12-01
description This study highlights the challenges of computer-mediated communication for vulnerable individuals and groups, by studying boundary work in stigmatized communities online. Five stigmatized online communities with different affordances were studied: (1) “pro-ana” blogs; (2) an infertility discussion board; (3) a Facebook group for bereaved parents; and (4) two WhatsApp groups for Israeli veterans of war with post-traumatic stress disorder. In-depth interviews with members and administrators ( n  = 66) revealed that social media affordances such as low anonymity and high visibility may marginalize those living with stigma. While research literature applauds social media for allowing the formation and maintenance of social capital, our study highlights the paradox caused by these very same affordances. To offer safe and functioning environments of support, the communities must guard against impostors whose presence threatens their safe havens. Simultaneously, this may make these groups inaccessible to those who truly need support and remove such groups from the public eye.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120984476
work_keys_str_mv AT daphnayeshuakatz catch22theparadoxofsocialmediaaffordancesandstigmatizedonlinesupportgroups
AT ylvahardafsegerstad catch22theparadoxofsocialmediaaffordancesandstigmatizedonlinesupportgroups
_version_ 1724370073807749120