Media Ethnography in Diasporic Communities

https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.49389

Putut Widjanarko(1*)

(1) Paramadina Graduate School of Communication Universitas Paramadina
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Media and communication technology plays a crucial role in diasporic communities by helping members to maintain complex connections with their places of origin, and at the same time to live their life in the diaspora. The social interactions, belief systems, identity struggles, and the daily life of diasporic communities are indeed reflected in their media consumption and production. A researcher can apply media ethnography to uncover some of the deeper meanings of diasporic experiences. However, a researcher should not take media ethnographic methods lightly since a variety of issues must be addressed to justify its use as a legitimate approach. This article examines various forms of media ethnographic fieldwork (multi-sited ethnography), issues related to researching one’s own community (native ethnography), and the debates surrounding duration of immersion in ethnography research within the context of diasporic communities. Careful consideration of such issues is also necessary to establish the “ethnographic authority” of the researcher.

Keywords


diaspora; ethnography; media; multi-sited; native

Full Text:

PDF


References

Abdulrehman, M. S. (2015). Reflections on native ethnography by a nurse researcher. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 28(2), 152-158.

Abu-Lughod, L. (1988). Fieldwork of a dutiful daughter. In S. Altorki, & C. Fawzi El-Solh, Arab women in the field: Studying your own society (pp. 139-161). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Acosta-Alzuru, C. (2005). Home is where my heart is: reflections on doing research in my native country. Popular Communication, 3(3), 181-193.

Aguilar, J. A. (1981). Insider research: An ethnography of a debate. In D. A. Messerschmidt, Anthropologists at home in North America: Methods and issues in the study of one’s own society (pp. 15-26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Alasuutari, P. (1999). Introduction: Three phases of reception studies. In P. Alasuutari (Ed.), Rethinking the media audience: The new agenda (pp. 1-21). London: Sage.

Allor, M. (1988). Relocating the site of the audience. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 5, 217-233.

Altorki, S. (1988). At home in the field. In S. Altorki, & C. Fawzi El-Solh, Arab women in the field: Studying your own society (pp. 49-68). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Altorki, S., & Fawzi El-Solh, C. (Eds.). (1988a). Arab women in the field: Studying your own society. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Altorki, S., & Fwazi El-Solh, C. (1988b). Introduction. In S. Altorki, & C. Fawzi El-Solh, Arab women in the field: Studying your own society (pp. 1-23). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Ang, I. (1985). Watching Dallas: Soap opera and melodramatic imagination. London & New York: Metheun.

Ang, I. (1996). Ethnography and radical contextualism in audience studies. In J. Hay, L. Grossberg, E. Wartella (Eds.), The audience and its landscape (pp. 247-264). Boulder: Westview Press.

Appadurai, A. (1988). Putting hierarchy in its place. Cultural Anthropology, 3(1), 36-49.

Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimension of globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Asad, T. (2002). From the history of colonial anthropology to the anthropology of Western hegemony. In J. Vincent (Ed.), The anthropology of politics: A reader in ethnography, theory, and critique (pp. 133-142). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Balzer, M. M. (1995). What’s “native” about non-Russian anthropology? In M. M. Balzer (Ed.), Culture incarnates: Native anthropology from Russia (pp. 3-30). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Bhandari, K. B. (2019). Media ethnography: Demands alternative. The Qualitative Report, 24(1), 193-203.

Bird, E. (1992). Travels in nowhere land: Ethnography and the “impossible” audience. Critical Studies in Communication, 9, 250-260.

Bird, E. (2003). The audience in everyday life: Living in a media world. Routledge: New York and London.

Buroway, M. (2000). Introduction: Reaching for the global. In M. Buroway, et al. (Eds.), Global ethnography: Forces, connections, and imaginations in a postmodern world (pp. 1-40). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clifford, J. (1986). Partial truths. In J. Clifford & G. E. Marcus, (Eds.), Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography (pp. 1-26). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clifford, J. (1997). Routes: Travel and translation in the late twentieth century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Couldry, N. (2003). Passing ethnographies: Rethinking the sites of agency and reflexivity in a mediated world. In P. M. Murphy and M. M. Kraidy, Global media studies: Ethnographic perspectives (pp. 40-56). New York and London: Routledge.

Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Diraj, M. (2010). Muslim punks online: A diasporic Pakistani music subculture on the Internet. South Asian Popular Culture, 8(2), 181-194.

Falzon, M. A. (2009). Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis, and locality in contemporary research. In M. A. Falzon (ed). Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis, and locality in contemporary research (pp. 1-23). Surrey, UK & Burlington, USA: Ashgate.

Ferguson, J. (2009).  Novelty and method: Reflections on global fieldwork. In M. A. Falzon (ed). Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis, and locality in contemporary research (pp. 195-207). Surrey, UK & Burlington, USA: Ashgate.

Gille, Z., & Riain, S. Ó. (2002). Global ethnography. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 271-295.

Gilroy, P. (1994). Diaspora. Paragraph, 17(1), 207-212.

Grossberg, L. (1988). Wandering audiences, nomadic critics. Cultural Studies, 2(3), 377-390.

Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (1997). Discipline and practice: “The field” as site, method, and location in anthropology. In A. Gupta & J. Ferguson, Anthropological locations: Boundaries and grounds for a field science (pp. 1-46). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Hall, S. (1973). Encoding and decoding in the television discourse. Birmingham: Centre of Cultural Studies, University of Birmingham.

Hannerz, U. (2003). Being there . . . and there . . . and there: Reflections on multi-site ethnography. Ethnography, 4(2), 201-216.

Hannoum, A. (2011). The (re)turn of the native: Ethnography, anthropology, and nativism. In H. Seneviratne (Ed.), The anthropologist and the native: Essays for Gananath Obeyesekere (pp. 423-444). Anthem Press.

Hendry, J. (2003 ). An ethnography in the global arena: Globography perhaps? Global Networks, 3(4), 497-512.

Indiyanto, A. (2012). The politics of belonging: Plundering the local, claiming the global. Humaniora, 24(3), 245-254.

Isaacs, E. (2016). The value of rapid ethnography. In B. Jordan, Advancing ethnography in corporate environments: Challenges and emerging opportunities (pp. 92-107). New York: Routledge.

Jacobs-Huey, L. (2002). The natives are gazing and talking back: Reviewing the problematics of positionality, voice, and accountability among “native” anthropologists. American Anthropologist, 104(3), 791-804.

Jeffrey, B., & Troman, G. (2004). Time for ethnography. British Education Research Journal, 30(4), 535-548.

Junnilainen, L. & Luhtakallio. E. (2015). Media Ethnography. In Mazzoleni (ed.). The International Encyclopaedia of Political Communication. John Wiley & Sons.

Knoblauch, H. (2005). Focused ethnography. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(3). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/20/43,  August 24, 2019.

Koentjaraningrat. (1982). Anthropology in developing countries. In H. Fahim, (Ed.), Indigenous anthropology in non-Western countries: Proceedings of a Burg Wartenstein Symposium (pp. 176-191). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Kraidy, M. M. (1996). Towards a semiosphere if hybrid identities: A native ethnography of glocalization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, Athens.

Kraidy, M. M., & Murphy, P. D. (2003). Media ethnography: Local, global, or translocal? In P. M. Murphy and M. M. Kraidy, Global media studies: Ethnographic perspectives (pp. 299-307). New York and London: Routledge.

Kuklick, H. (1997). After Ishmael: The fieldwork tradition and its future. In A. Gupta & J. Ferguson, Anthropological locations: Boundaries and grounds for a field science (pp. 47-65). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kuwayama, T. (2004). Native anthropology: The Japanese challenge to Western academic hegemony. Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press.

Lavie, S., & Swedenburg, T. (1996). Between and among the boundaries of culture: Bridging text and lived experience in the third time space. Cultural Studies, 10(1), 154-179.

Malinowski, B. (1961). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc.

Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95-117.

Marcus, G. E. (1998). Ethnography through thick and thin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Marcus, G. E. (1999). What is at stake—and is not—in the idea and practice of multi-sited ethnography. Canberra Anthropology, 22(2), 6-14.

Marcus, G. E. (2002). Beyond Malinowski and after Writing Culture: On the future of cultural anthropology and the predicament of ethnography. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 13(2), 191-199.

Marcus, G. E. (2011). Multi-sited ethnography: Five or six things I know about it now. In S. Coleman & P. von Hellerman (eds.), Multi-sited ethnography: Problems and possibilities in the translocation of research methods (pp. 16-32). New York & London: Routledge.

Marcus, G. E., & Fischer, M. M. (1986). Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media, the extension of man. New York: Mentor Book.

Messerschmidt, D. A. (Ed.) (1981). Anthropologists at home in North America: Methods and issues in the study of one’s own society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Morley, D. (2000). Home territories: Media, mobility, and identity. London & New York: Routledge.

Murphy, P. (2011). Locating media ethnography. In V. Nightingale, The handbook of media audiences (pp. 380-401). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Murphy, P. & Kraidy, M. (2003). Towards an ethnographic approach to global media studies. In P. Murphy & M. Kraidy, Global media studies, Ethnographic perspectives. New York: Routledge.

Paterson, C. A. (2017). The ethnography of digital journalism. In  B. Franklin & S. Eldredge (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Digital Journalism Studies (pp. 108-116). Routledge: Abingdon, Oxfordshire.

Pink, S. & Morgan, S. (2013). Short-term ethnography: Intense routes to knowing. Symbolic Interaction, 36(3), 351-361.

Radway, J. A. (1984). Reading the romance: Women, patriarchy, and popular culture. The University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill.

Radway, J. A. (1988). Reception study: Ethnography and the problems of dispersed audiences and nomadic subjects. Cultural Studies, 2(3), 359-376.

Rits, R.C. (1980). Blitzkrieg ethnography: On the transformation of a method into a movement. Educational Researcher, 9(2), 8-10.

Ryang, S. (2005). Dilemma of a native: On location, authenticity, and reflexivity. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 6(2), 143-157.

Setianto, Y. P., (2016).  Media use and mediatization of transnational political participation: The case of transnational Indonesians in the United States. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, Athens.

Shumow, M. (2010). “A foot in both worlds”: Transnationalism and media use among Venezuelan immigrants in South Florida. International Journal of Communication, 4, 377-397.
Sun, W. & Sinclair, J. (Eds.). (2016). Media and communication in the Chinese diaspora: Rethinking transnationalism. London & New York: Routledge.

Tosoni, S. & Stiernstedt, F. (2016). Media ethnography for busy people. In Kramp, L et al. (eds.). Politics, civil society, and participation: Media and communications in a transforming environment. Bremen.

Võ, L. T. (2000). Performing ethnography in Asian-American communities: Beyond the insider-versus-outsider perspective. In M. F. Manalansan, IV, Cultural compass: Ethnographic exploration of Asian America (pp. 17-37). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Wardana, A. (2013). “Living in-between”: The multiple integration trajectories of the London Indonesian Muslim immigrants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Essex.

Weston, K. (1997). The virtual anthropologist. In A. Gupta & J. Ferguson, Anthropological locations: Boundaries and grounds for a field science (pp. 163-184). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Widjanarko, P. (2007). Homeland, identity and media: A study of Indonesian transnational Muslims in New York City. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, Athens.

Wolcott, H. W. (1999). Ethnography: A way of seeing. Walnut Creek CA: Altamira Press.

Yosihimura, A. (2015). To believe and not to believe: A native ethnography of Kanashibari in Japan. The Journal of American Folklore, 128(508), 146-148.

Zulfikar, T.  (2014). Researching my own backyard: inquiries into an ethnographic study. Ethnography and Education, 9(3), 373-386.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.49389

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 533 | views : 449

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2020 Jurnal Humaniora

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.



ISSN 2302-9269 (online); ISSN 0852-0801 (print)
Copyright © 2020 Humaniora, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada