Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
This dissertation may be made available to the general public for borrowing, photocopying or
consultation without prior consent of the author
2
Acknowledgements
The dissertation presented here was only made possible through the support of my employer
CPA Australia, in particular Rob Thomason for his initial approval. I would like to express
sincere thanks to my supervisor Dr Will Gibson for all his guidance and help in making this
research possible. Despite the long distances between us I am very grateful for all time afforded
Contents
Abstract 4
Introduction 5
Literature Review 16
Methodology 33
Conclusion 62
References 68
4
ABSTRACT
The aim of my research is to examine why users of Instagram post images of an art
hashtags and geotags. Images collected and analysed were of a modern art exhibition
hosted at the Queensland Gallery of Modern Art. Within this data set, I further posed
questions to selected users on their Instagram account, asking why they chose to post
examined how users perceived mediation of Instagram. Findings highlighted that users
From a practical perspective, the findings highlighted when art exhibition visitors use
Instagram, they may share, promote and endorse the event to others. I provide insight
into the community that exists on Instagram built around the hashtag #qagoma. I further
research within Instagram and make recommendations for potential areas of future
empirical work.
5
INTRODUCTION
This exhibition really affected me on a deep level. I felt as if the piece tapped into my
connection with 'the universal', an animalistic sense that what unifies all of us, human
and non-human, plant and beast, is thirst, a sense of connection through the universal
compassion that we all experience need- the great leveler. Whilst looking at the
installation I also had a deep sense of how impossible it is to hold both; the bigger
picture and the finer detail within the same moment, the same glance and to me, this is
the essence of being human - always attempting to zoom out & hold the context without
losing sight of the beauty that exists in our intricacies. I shared the photo on Instagram
because I share what connects me, what helps me to make meaning in the often chaotic
The modern day art gallery visitor engages in the emergent and mediated practice, of
using a smart device to capture photographic images, and post them to social media
networks such as Instagram. Instagram, a digital space rich in real-time and archived
images of art gallery visits, is the focus of this research. Instagram facilitates users
capturing images, manipulating them with filters, adding comments and location tags.
users. Art exhibitions are in synergy with Instagram’s model, offering a plethora of
embodied and emplaced sharing (Hubard, 2014; Hjorth and Pink, 2014). My research
intends to answer the question “why do people use Instagram when visiting an art
6
gallery exhibition?” Using the setting of the Queensland Gallery of Modern Art (GOMA),
in and around objects (vom Lehn et al., 2011). Focusing on the gallery, I gathered and
Instagram, and offer insight and experience into its practice supporting a qualitative
examined the use of smart phones and Instagram in a museum setting, finding users re-
curate exhibitions, and extend dialogue beyond the museum walls. Their research also
experiences” (2013: 8). Hu et al. (2014) researched Instagram seeking to answer the
question “What we Instagram?” Their analysis found user images in the main fell into 8
different photo categories: friends, food, gadgets, captioned photos, pets, activities,
and how users mediated their practice, engaging in creative tactics to circumvent
Instagram policies. Carah (2014) using a music festival setting, examined how
Instagram users curate everyday life, engaging in the production of value through
smartphone use in material cultural space. Finally Highfield and Leaver (2015)
examined the use of hashtag searching on Instagram as a research method, and the
ethical issues around public and private content on Instagram. As I understand it,
research is yet to specifically examine Instagram practice and the art gallery. To
7
address the gap, my exploratory study aims to research Instagramming from the user’s
perspective, analysing why they post images of an art gallery exhibition. To achieve this
aim, my dissertation will review the literature, examining identified areas such as
on the internet, and privacy concepts such as researcher lurking will be examined.
Following this, I will analyse the data and conclude by offering findings and potential
Instagram is self-described as a “fun and quirky way to share your life with friends
through a series of pictures.”1 It claims to have over 200,000,000 monthly active users,
and every day 60,000,000 pictures uploaded and 1,600,000,000 pictures liked. The
scale and reach of Instagram classes it as one of the world’s largest social networks.
Instagram accounts are free, users are encouraged to “capture and share the world’s
moments” with “friends and family” (Instagram, 2014). Image sharing is a ubiquitous
practice, building an archive of everyday life through images. Thurlow and Jawroski
(2011) consider such concentrated and repetitive photography not as mundane, but
(vom Lehn et al., 2001). Galleries are “sacred grove” (Eisner and Dobb, 1988: 8), and
have driven sociologists to ask questions about visitor practice, aesthetic experience,
silent pedagogy and thematic bias (EIlliot and Dobbs, 1988; Weilenmann et al., 2013;
Consoli, 2014; Hubard, 2014). Visitors are the phenomenological centre of the gallery
(Pallud, 2009). Their interaction with art creates a dialogical relationship between
experience and meaning. Consoli (2014) argues our minds are conditioned to make
decisions. When viewing art, we strive for understanding. The gallery environment,
curatorial intervention and visitor competency all assist to negotiate this process.
Modern day gallery visitors bring an expectation to use personal smart devices. Smart
devices are participatory sensing systems, carrying in-built high definition cameras,
and normally remain on and connected all of the time (Silva et al., 2013). Contemporary
gallery management facilitates, and encourages the taking of photos and social sharing.
Galleries demonstrate this through free Wi-Fi, their own social media managed
accounts, smart device applications and QR codes, displayed around the gallery linking
to web hosted information. Russo et al. (2008) and Black (2010) argue that galleries
enable both the critique and creation of digital and visual culture by promoting visitor
9
generated content. Practically, sharing images of art housed within a gallery, also
personal aesthetic experience with the public through Instagram. I observed the tourist
gaze in the art gallery; photos, selfies, playful performance and posing. These acts are
what vom Lehn et al. (2001) consider as social interaction, participation and mediation;
flowing between individual and object. This private behaviour made public is symbolic
(2014) considers our interaction with an art object may be a way of internally revealing
defining an ongoing polysemic identity of the work. Aesthetic experience may forcibly
reduce the art to text, a narrative construction of its reality (Bruner, 1991). Visitors may
What Eisner and Dobbs (1988) call the ‘silent pedagogy’ of the gallery; the information
guidebook, marketing material, labels, reviews and stories. Words that bias and
influence the visitors meaning and interpretation of art (Hubard, 2014). Curatorial
intervention also creates bias at an art exhibition. The curator may navigate the tension
between the needs of the art and the needs of the audience (Cleland, 2014). The
curatorial objective of intellectual honesty, balanced against the need for institutional
practicality. Alternatively gallery visitors may enter an abstract ontological state, where
Attaway, 2014). There are important questions to ask as to where Instagram fits within
the aesthetic experience, and its impacts on a visitor’s appreciation of art. Objects of art,
being. The viewer part of an ontological encounter, created at the gallery, on what
Research into social media practice has considered the extension, and co-presence, of
the physical self in the digital environment (Hjorth and Pink, 2014). This extension is not
structure. Their physical movement restricted and guided around the art. ‘Please do not
touch the artwork’ signs moderating behaviour, security guards standing watchfully. Like
drivers on the road, limited by agency, mediating marked lanes, road rules and signage.
This is what Giddens (1984) terms the duality of structure; the structured environment
enables individual practices as it also constrains (Kidder, 2009). The important question
is whether the visitor appropriates the space needed to fulfil an aesthetic experience, or
do they follow the rules, psychologically nudged from entry to exit. An Instagram user
that takes and shares a photo of art, creates new invisible and virtual space (Kahn,
2003). Hjorth and Pink’s (2014) research into digital wayfaring and new visualities,
consider the abstract conditions of place and space when examining images in the
online and offline environment. They argue camera phone photography is part of an
“emerging ecology of place where humans, the material, and digital are increasingly
11
entangled” with a focus on emplacement over network (2014: 54). Lefebvre’s (1974)
writing on space spoke of three categories: conceived, perceived and lived space. The
(Watkins, 2005). Lived space includes “people’s sense making, imagination, and
feeling” (Zhang, 2006: 221). Visitors to an art gallery are creating lived space, and
traces of that subjective experience are collected, through images and comments
posted to Instagram. Kahn (2003) considers an animated dialogue exists between ideas
of place and the physical reality of their material representation. Instagram’s user
representations of a place are part of its ongoing spatialization. Such gallery visitor
observe captured moments of this embodied, emplaced and evolving spatial experience
For my research I chose a popular art exhibition, Falling Back to Earth by artist Cai
Guo-Qiang, which was held at the Queensland Gallery of Modern Art (GOMA). Gallery
Director Chris Saines (2014) described Cai Guo-Qiang’s art over the past 25 years as
social projects.” Falling Back to Earth was a successful acquisition for the Gallery, being
their second highest attended ticketed exhibition. It attracted more than 229,000 visitors
with nature, including three major pieces inspired by Queensland’s landscape. Cai Guo
Qiang created this exhibition to “reflect on the idea of coming full circle – of working
2
http://visualarts.qld.gov.au/news/media/2014/issue085_release/index.html (accessed 6 November 2014)
12
through competing aspects of human nature, as well as the obstacles we face in our
relationships with our environment and each other, now and into the future” 3. The three
works forming the exhibition were Eucalyptus (image 1), Head On (image 2) and
Heritage (see image 3). Eucalyptus (2013) was a 31-metre tree suspended along
GOMA’s central Long Gallery, sourced from an area cleared for urban development.
The work was inspired by the ancient trees of Lamington National Park, and created a
meditative, immersive experience for visitors (Storer, 2013). Head On (2006) was a
signature work of the artist displaying 99 life-size sculptures of wolves leaping into a
glass wall. Heritage (2013) an installation of “99 replicas of animals including pandas,
tigers, bears, giraffes and kangaroos, lowering their heads to drink water together from
a lake that is surrounded by white sand, evoking the islands of Brisbane’s Moreton Bay”
(Storer, 2013: 1)4. All three works are what Holloway-Attaway (2014) might describe as
3
http://visualarts.qld.gov.au/flipbook/cai_room_brochure/ (accessed 6 November 2014)
4
http://www.qagoma.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/156541/FallingBackToEarth_MK_EN.pdf
(accessed 6 November 2014)
13
Image 1, Eucalyptus, Artist, Cai Guo Qiang, Copyright Queensland Art Gallery, 2013
Image 2, Head On, Artist, Cai Guo Qiang, Copyright Queensland Art Gallery, 2013
14
Image 3, Heritage, Artist, Cai Guo Qiang, Copyright Queensland Art Gallery, 2013
scholarly attention increases in this area (Quan-Haase and Martin, 2013). Despite
Instagram’s popularity, published research is not widely available with scholars still
investigating questions around motivations for use, and social practices (Hu et al., 2014;
because it will help us gain deep insights about social, cultural and environmental
issues about people’s activities (through the lens of their photos).”(Hu et al., 2014: 595).
community to further understand ways in which moments of everyday life, are being
“represented, collated and disseminated online” (Quan-Haase and Martin, 2013: 4).
Carah (2014) considers there are risks to the community if the social media industry has
algorithms to control how many of their services appear to users (Litt, 2012). These
15
algorithms, often based on huge data sets, reduce complex human behaviour and
relationships to a ‘predict and respond’ model (Andrejevic, 2013). This highlights the
study the small data. Olszanowski’s (2014) research is an example of this. In her study
she focuses on three women and their tactical engagement to circumvent Instagram’s
censorship practices. Her method uses discursive analysis of image postings, semi
(2014) does not seek generalizability, something big data studies often attempt. She
arguably sought a complex, deep, and rich understanding of her participant’s behaviour.
As Tufekci (2014b: 6) states “sometimes, the only way to study people is to study
moods were ‘contagious’. Their actions raised larger concerns in the academic
(Tufekci, 2014a). A further highlight of the need for balanced and ethical academic
LITERATURE REVIEW
This dissertation has framed my research as an exploratory study into the use of
Instagram at a contemporary art exhibition. I now turn to the wider literature which
identified the following themes related to my research: (1) presentation of self and
imagined audience, (2) sharing, (3) embodied action, (4) aesthetic experience, (5) the
Presentation of self
through social norms and imagined audiences (Goffman, 1959; Posner, 1978;
Robinson, 2007; Marwick and boyd, 2011b). According to Goffman’s (1959) pre-internet
performances to meet and exceed the expectations of multiple audiences. Their aim is
others (Goffman, 1959; Hogan, 2010; Pettit, 2011; Raffel, 2013). Such presentations
are not static, but constantly negotiated through visual cues or signs, passed between
the front and back stage, being abstract places where behaviour is managed to a
17
conceptual audience, observing rules and social convention (Posner, 1978; Bullingham
and Vasconcelos, 2013). Goffman’s theory is built upon the work of Cooley’s (1902)
‘looking-glass self’, and Mead’s (1934) concept of reflexivity. Cooley’s (1902) ‘looking-
glass self’ is a process, imaging how self appears to others, other’s judgement of that
experienced from the standpoints of others (Robinson, 2007). These are concepts
interaction with others, and interpreted through each other’s language, gestures and
actions as symbols (Marwick and boyd, 2011b). Imagination plays a key role, as the self
Goffman’s (1959) theory and concepts dealt principally in the face-to-face domain.
Posting content to social media services like Instagram, has been linked to ‘impression
management’ (Hogan, 2010; Litt, 2012). Hogan (2012) considers this behaviour a
party (e.g., Instagram). Exhibitions are still performances, but they are recorded acts,
not live. There is an ability to reflect, edit and manipulate content in a recorded act,
unlike the pressure of a live performance. Hogan (2012) argues that online curated
exhibition “has its own logic”, its ontological difference to performance may go unnoticed
(Hogan, 2012: 384). Bullingham and Vasconcelos’s (2013) study found identity online
was anchored to individuals’ offline identity. Users in their study engaged in self-editing
and embellishment of personal traits such as age, which relates to the concept of
presenting an idealized version of oneself. Offline and online identity are never the
same, together they form a ‘blended identity’ (Baker, 2009). They are deeply connected,
but always separate. Turkle (1995: 14) uses the metaphor of windows to describe this
negotiating and navigating multiple identities or personalities, extending the self beyond
narrative, authored by the offline self. They dialogically shape each other in a
Vasconcelos, 2013). The separation cannot be too great, this may create confusion,
studied the application of presentation of self to internet dating, and found people were
strategic in the way they present themselves online. A goal of participation in an internet
dating site is to build relationships. Steps include building a profile to attract interest,
online to offline. To borrow Goffman’s (1959) dramaturgical metaphor, will the actor’s
performance be judged by the audience to be real or a fraud. Whitty (2008) argued if the
online self misrepresents the offline, the users strategy to successfully build a
relationship will fail. So whilst profile photos may seek to exaggerate perceived
aesthetic qualities of the person, if they are too far removed from the actual self, the
Imagined audience
study into quantifying the invisible social media audience, found perceptions of
audience size did not match reality. Instagram does not offer detailed analytics, such as
audience. If followers are the minimum, then the entire global networked public is the
maximum. Hogan (2010) questions whether we ever fully realise our audience size. The
space between our close private friends and the faceless mass of the public, has been
call a hybrid audience (Marwick and boyd, 2011b; Quan-Haase and Martin, 2013).
Dunbar (1998) believes individuals have cognitive limits to the number of people we can
visualisation, is also based on our experience with real audiences (Fridlund, 1991). On
Instagram content that receives more ‘likes’ or comments may influence future
against peers or imagined communities, and mimic that behaviour in their own content
(Litt, 2012; Marwick and boyd, 2014). According to Goffman (1959) behaviour is
modified dependent on context, and the non-verbal cues passed between actor and
audience (Marwick and boyd, 2011b). Context and non-verbal cues within face-to-face
(1995) argues people use any expressive resources available to them as cues or to add
context. This may include use of exaggerated text, emoticons or hashtags. Online
20
performances or exhibitions may not be received in the context they were intended
(Hogan, 2010). This situation has been called context collapse (boyd, 2007). Context
collapse in the public social media domain is the flattening of multiple group contexts, or
bringing together of multiple audiences, creating tension within the user to navigate
(Marwick and boyd, 2011a). Online anyone may see anything, from a social context to a
professional one. Problematic content, once placed on a server, may plausibly be seen
by anyone forever. Even attempts to remove content are futile once it has been copied
and shared. Security flaws, data theft and hacking, also undermine attempts to control
content online. Online exhibitions are traceable to an individual, not controllable by pre-
determined context, in the way live performances are. The importance of mediating and
Sharing
participation (Marwick and boyd, 2014). The concept of ‘sharing’ is under-theorized and
the term overloaded (John, 2013). When people use the term ‘sharing’, it may not be
clear what they are sharing. In the case of Instagram it may seem obvious; one is
sharing an image and comment. A deeper enquiry shows what is being shared is
something far more complex; it has “various meanings, logics and implications”
(Tufekci, 2014b: 1). Collectively, curated and posted images on Instagram form a
socially constructed, shared narrative (Vivienne and Burgess, 2013). Users are sharing
21
their image based remediation of reality, reflexively considered and re-contextualised for
on Instagram all reference the practice of sharing.5 My research will contribute to the
understanding of sharing; I directly questioned users on why they share. Deller’s (2011)
research into Twitter, found sharing was a way of recommending things to others, that
the user found enjoyable. People share their images on Instagram for themselves
(Brake, 2012), their close friends, followers, the public or a hybrid audience. Urry’s
(2002) hermeneutic cycle suggests visitors may come to the gallery, with the goal of
capturing an image they’ve already seen published elsewhere; so they can show others
and prove they were there. The hermeneutic cycle is constructed by the professional
and commercial practices of corporate marketing and the media, as well as the semiotic
and discursive practice of other tourists (Thurlow and Jawroski, 2014). It is arguably
messages may have multiple meanings or purposes, and are inherently recursive
response and action from others (Grusin, 2010). Sharing on Instagram has also been
users. The user in taking a stance, share something about themselves, either explicitly
or through inference. Users structure their feeling, forming image based relationships or
connections with others (Hearn, 2010). John (2013) considers when we share our life or
world on Instagram, we are sharing fuzzy objects. Fuzzy as it is not clear what sharing
5
https://help.instagram.com/477434105621119/ (accessed 15 December 2014).
22
our life or our world entails. Sharing our life implies sociality; our life is unique from
others and must be shared to help build relationships and reputation (John, 2013).
feedback loops” created as users leave digital traces of self (Grusin, 2010: 100). Even
though several images may be taken, ultimately only one may be uploaded to
Instagram. This could be due to what Hjorth and Pink (2013) term creative incubation. A
period after the image is taken and before it is uploaded. Creative incubation has also
been labelled by Vivienne and Burgess (2013) as the production phase. During this
phase the user is engaged in an intimate, self-reflective, inner speech (Vygotsky, 1978;
Rowe, 2009). Reflexive thought questioning oneself whether to distribute the content.
An example is what Thurlow and Jawroski (2011) term pejorative tone, where a user
explicitly and cynically shows awareness of an obvious role in the hermeneutic cycle.
vom Lehn et al. (2001) consider the audience in perceptual range of a person, may
influence what they choose to see in the gallery. My research may show whether
Instagram users perceived online audience as influential in what they saw in the gallery.
The possibility of reaching a new and public audience may also motivate users to share
(Quan-Haase and Martin, 2013). Followers on Instagram symbolise the account owner’s
popularity, whether real or illusory (fake followers). Hogan (2010) considers users
seeking to increase their followers, are driven by social indicators like offline popularity,
and enhanced ‘digital reputation’. Not a desire to actually feel close to them, or know
them personally. In some cases popular Instagram accounts derive offline economic
23
posting content about art or gallery visits may build authenticity to that identity (Russo et
al., 2008). Thurlow and Jawroski’s (2011) tourist haze also adds to our understanding of
sharing. They argue there is cultural and social value in the photos and stories that are
gained through a visit to an art gallery. The value only realised through sharing with
others.
around common interests (Russo et al., 2008; Schandorf, 2012). Hashtag use is
evidence of these communities (Alper, 2014). Hashtagging began on the internet and
extended outside into mainstream media and popular culture. It has been described as
having an extraordinarily high capacity for cultural generativity (Bruns and Burgess,
2011; Burgess, 2011). The formation of communities or ad hoc publics around specific
2011). Hashtagging adds users content to a community of others engaged with the
same hashtag. Hashtags may be descriptive and imaginative, literal and figurative.
People use hashtags to express emotion, attitude and mood, giving their posts extra-
textual meaning (Bruns and Burgess, 2011). Once a user creates a hashtag, the
community of others begin to support, shape, change or challenge its meaning through
repeated use. Meaning is derived either exclusively, or through shared definition. For
government control of citizens. Users may hijack popular hashtags with the motivation
of increasing viewers of their image or profile, even though their image contains no
relation to the keyword/ hashtag (Deller, 2011). Competing publics may engage in
protracted debate about the appropriateness of use of a certain hashtag (Bruns and
arbitrator exists that accepts one use over another. Ultimately the stronger participatory
Aesthetic experience
community, and the collections of photographs represent practical knowledge about the
world (Kennedy et al., 2007). Visual culture may be defined as the “shared practices of
a group, community, or society through which meanings are made out of the visual,
aural, and textual world of representations” (Sturken and Cartwright, 2009: 3, cited in
repetitive photographic representation of what exists in the real world (Hjorth and Pink,
2014). Users represent their aesthetic experience on Instagram; representing the visual
as visual. The setting of my research, the public art gallery, is a historical and iconic
social aesthetic experience (Consoli, 2014). Visitors may seek to learn, appreciate, be
25
entertained; admire artistic skill and creativity. Visitors form part of the creative process,
their engagement and experience being what realises the full value of the object
(Dewey, 1934; Edmonds et al., 2009). Epistemologically, Consoli (2014) argues that the
goal of the aesthetic experience is knowing. For most, the aesthetic experience is how
Pierroux et al. (2011) consider aesthetic experience and learning are intertwined; it is
how we know things to be true or real. The aesthetic surrounds our daily life and
influences our emotional state. We interpret the aesthetic, and that interpretation causes
us to react. Objects of art placed in the gallery are encoded with meaning. Interpretation
constructed. Pierroux et al. (2011) considers there are conceptual differences between
(1994) argues a single, objective understanding of the art may never be possible.
approach to knowledge (Langridge, 1989, cited in Winget, 2009). Even if the artist’s
intervenes and nudges our interpretation (Eisner and Dobbs, 1988; Hubard, 2014).
According to Burham (1994: 523) the objective of the aesthetic experience is the
and memory. A user may creatively incubate their art gallery visit when in the production
26
(Hjorth and Pink, 2013). Instagram is a chronology of the everyday performance of life
through image and text. Reflection encourages a deep and distinctive experience of the
specific artworks, something gallery educators strive towards (Pringle, 2009; Burnham
and Kai-Kee, 2011 cited in Hubard, 2014). Consoli (2014: 45) considers processes like
reflective writing engage our ‘extended mind’. The ‘extended mind’ is where technology
and manipulation form the extension of our mind. Our imagination, by virtue of language
and symbolic memory, is able to be freed from perceptual constraints. Using Instagram
to extend our aesthetic experience engages one’s imagination in image editorial, writing
and place (Hjorth and Pink, 2014; Consoli, 2014). I am interested how people mediate
nonlocal perception, and whether technology like Instagram may engage our extended
mind and facilitate creative thought (Schwartz, 2015). In particular my research aims to
Digital curators
art takes content, and presents it to an audience. Making decisions on how the art is
represented, as both a director and author of the exhibition (Quan-Haase and Martin,
their experience of each work. Lubar (2014) considers professional curators have
27
expertise in content, design and audience. According to Edmonds et al. (2009) a gallery
within the piece. Juggling the tensions created between social and managerial
exhibition, themselves create and perform art. Curators like performers imagine and
visualise their audience, intuitively considering how an audience may interpret an object
being put on display (Hogan, 2010; Lubar, 2014). Instagrammers are curators; digital
curators (Weilenmann et al., 2013). Vivienne and Burgess (2013) consider Instagram
include additional descriptive information for the viewer such as key facts. Ventzislavov
(2014) links Instagram images posted, to creating new narratives, meanings or value;
new thoughts for existing objects or places. Like professional curators, Instagrammers
single reality. Each single reality seen collectively through multiple perspectives, forms a
Martin, 2013). Thurlow and Jaworski (2014) highlight curation on Instagram may also be
a trivial practice. A cursory observation of social media services shows phatic, banal
and absent content (Schandorf, 2012). Users curating everyday routines, food about to
be consumed or clothes they are wearing (Ekstrand and Silver, 2014). Ventzislavov
(2014) cautions curation on Instagram may not be artistic selection or creating new
thoughts, but sanctifying commonplace objects. The specific practice in the scope of
this research, is posting photographed art works to Instagram. The curated images of
28
and Martin, 2013). The Instagram framework creates an environment of neutrality and
quasi-democracy, each user being free to place their perspective of art in a public digital
space (Black, 2010; Hubard, 2014). The perceptual space filled with each individual’s
with professional curatorial practice, the amount of intervention by the curator may
influence its interpretation (Quan-Haase and Martin, 2013). Intervention is one’s own
consider individual social media profiles as linked to the identity of the curator. Limited
intervention in curated objects does not necessarily lead to poor curation. Particularly in
the context of art; Hubard (2014) and Winget (2009) consider modern art education
encourages and honours each person’s subjective interpretation. But key factual
(2014) human curators are driven by curiosity, and what they find interesting. What is
digitally curated could be seen as a product of that curiosity or interest, a window into
the mind of the curator. My research aims to contribute to our knowledge of digital
curation.
Embodied action
Gallery curators may encourage visitor’s physical interaction or involvement with an art
exhibition. This physical activity may be defined as embodied action, and in the context
photo taken of oneself by oneself. Ekstrand and Silver (2014) argue the goal of the
selfie is approval and validation from others. Possible motivations for selfies are their
potential to strengthen one’s self-image, gain social capital amongst peer group and
broadcast of self, place, time and audience (Erickson, 2010: 388 cited in Quan-Haase
and Martin, 2013). Selfies are also an example of narcissism, what Litt (2012) terms the
the audience attention to our facial and bodily features, selfies victoriously place self
prominently within the image (Thurlow and Jawroski, 2011). Art gallery visitor posing
depicts internalized meaning (Vygotsky, 1978; Steier, 2014). The body serves the
experience (Streeck, 2009 in Steier, 2014). Physical interactions with artworks are
playful performances (Thurlow and Jaworski, 2011). Posing ranges from internalized
pose appropriates space in the gallery (Lefebvre, 1974; Steier, 2014; Kidder, 2009). It
disrupts the power paradigm between the visitor and gallery, and enacts and
reproduces relations through spatial interaction (Jawroski and Thurlow, 2014). Image
happy, sad, serious, with friends, on our own, in private or in public (Larsen, 2005).
Posing, like language, embeds meaning, concepts that mediate human thinking and
activity (Vygotsky, 1978; Wertsch, 1985). According to Steier (2014) mimetic gesturing
is observed when a pose attempts to mimic the art, implicitly assigning intentionality to
30
the artist, embodying a ’posed question’ about the potential meanings of a work. My
Space
Embodied action occupies individual physical space. The digital and virtual space of
(Thurlow and Jaworski, 2011: 9). Unlike measurable physical space, the new virtual
space that is created and developed by each user on Instagram, has no conceptual
boundaries. Each user is free to take up their exclusive and protected digital space,
The spatialized doctrine that exists within Instagram, controls what can be placed on
Instagram and in what format. Profile names for example are unique, and cannot be
duplicated. Jawroski and Thurlow (2009) consider the continued and repetitive practice
of uploading photos to one’s Instagram profile, as rehearsing a claim over that space,
producing within the user a sense of ownership. The Instagram Community Guidelines
aim to “keep Instagram a safe and fun place for everyone” 6. Breaching these guidelines
hour suspension during my data collection, which I believe was due to breaching
Instagram’s rules of making repetitive comments. Whilst my profile and space still
existed, I was prohibited from commenting on others images, for a 24 hour time-out
6
https://help.instagram.com/477434105621119/ (accessed 6 December 2014)
31
study on feminist self-imaging and Instagram, found users in her research employed
tacit tactics to circumvent, or side-step, Instagram’s guidelines. These tacit tactics, she
argues, highlight the hegemonic, parochial and conservative nature of Instagram’s rules
versus the human user. Olszanowski (2014) considers some of these tactics as a form
into skateboarders and the city, he found a dialectical relationship between individual
play and the city’s built structures. Skateboarders not following normative rules,
‘ordinary perceptions’ and ‘official conceptions’, but experiencing and appropriating the
city space in creative and unintended ways (Kidder, 2009). Instagram is a digital space,
(Wilson, 2009; Quan-Haase and Martin, 2013). A person taking a photograph, and
space (Hjorth and Pink, 2014). What Holloway-Attaway (2014) phrase as ‘being here
and there’. Lefebvre (1974) wrote about the production of space in the pre-internet era.
is drawn to the lived space, which is considered to embody both perceived and
conceived space, without being reducible to either (Zhang, 2006). Whilst lived space is
between physical and virtual. Kidder’s (2009) ethnographic research into bicycle
32
messengers highlighted individuals determine how space will be lived through their
material interaction within it, regardless of how use of that space was planned in its
design. As an example, I observed Instagram users taking the space created to geotag
a physical location. Rather than use that space for its designed purpose, they
mood. Even though this option was designed to enter a new place name should one not
exist already, the users take the space and alter its purpose through their everyday
experience (the ‘lived’ (Lefebvre, 1974)). Instagramming is a local and global digitised
condition, existing in a ‘hybrid space’. Hybrid space has been defined as “social
situations in which the borders between remote and contiguous contexts no longer can
be clearly defined” (Gordon and de Souza e Silva, 2011: 86 in Quan-Haase and Martin,
2013). Where Instagram occupies the unbounded digital space in this research, the art
gallery setting is the physical space (Robinson, 2007). An art gallery combines the
physical elements of building design, visitors, staff with socio-cultural norms and
communicative practices. Together creating what Jawroski and Thurlow (2009) term a
semiotic space. The physical framework and the social performance, create the
METHODOLOGY
In this chapter I will explain my research methodology. I will discuss the identified ethical
researched within Instagram I will offer insight to its use from a researcher’s
research areas.
To answer the question “why people use Instagram when they visit an art gallery?” I
went straight to the source, Instagram and its users. I conducted an observation of
Instagram user postings, representing the Cai Guo-Qiang exhibition Falling Back to
Earth, held at the Queensland Gallery of Modern Art in Brisbane from 23 November
2013 - 11 May 2014. From this set of posts, I randomly sampled a smaller group of 294
and questioned them specifically on why they posted this image and comment to
(Glaser and Strauss, 1967). As a first step I collected 2,237 image posts from
Instagram. To search for the images I selected only ones that had been hashtagged or
geotagged. Geotagging was used as a technique to collect data of over 110,000 images
by Kennedy et al. (2007) in their study on Flickr. Data sourced through this technique
may require visual evaluation by the researcher to remove images not within scope. My
research was focused on Falling Back to Earth only, so I needed to manually remove
some images that were tagged but not within scope of my study. There are practical
implications for the researcher, the larger the data set the more onerous this activity
becomes; the more human intervention and evaluation required to achieve a cleaner
34
data set. The Kennedy et. al. (2007) study confirmed the more visual analysis used (not
necessarily human) the greater the precision of the selected images within scope.
being researched. The hashtag I searched was #qagoma, a popular tag used by visitors
and the corporate account of the GOMA. An advantage of this hashtag is it is not a
common keyword, so the majority of images were specific to the GOMA. A hashtag that
is also a common keyword or term, such as #art, would potentially require a greater
amount of cleaning. The disadvantage of selecting data this way, is it selects the
sample based on a dependent variable (Tufekci, 2014b). This was offset by some
degree to the additional data I selected through geotags. The geotags (longitudinal and
latitudinal coordinates) were labelled Gallery of Modern Art and G.O.M.A.. However the
geotag provided an efficient technique to collect this data set; had this function not been
available it would have been nearly impossible to collect this data. A drawback of this
technique is that it overlooked cases where the causes and correlates of tagging were
present, but in which there were no resulting tags (Tufekci, 2014b). In addition
searching by tags meant users self-selected into the group, as they chose to use the tag
in their post (Tufekci, 2014b). Not every user is competent with the process of tagging,
generally is anchored to many social, cultural and economic factors and is not
representative to the general population (Silva et al., 2013). I did not approach this
Once collected I then open-coded all images using an iterative process of inductive
analysis; repeatedly examining and comparing the codes against the data. Having
reached a level of saturation in the coding process, I looked for themes that emerged
As the third step I posted 294 questions on a random sample group of user images,
taken from the larger data set. I asked an open question to all users “why did you post
this photo and comment to Instagram?” The purpose of this form of questioning was to
directly gather data from the Instagram user, inside the space of Instagram. I was
guided by Marwick and boyd’s (2011b) study on Twitter, where they sourced user
36
responses posted by each user (see table 2.). I then compared codes I’d created
against the first stage codes, to see what if any, relationships existed between codes
and processes.
Code Amount
Sharing 39
Personal feeling 23
Highlight aesthetic value 23
Photogenic 15
Life document 13
Interpretation 13
Encourage others 12
Promotion 10
Ephemeral 9
Hashtag search 8
Photo as art 6
Impression management 5
Credit work 3
Curator 2
Interaction 2
After completing the coding process, I conducted a literature review, using keywords
such as the themes I had observed emerge from the data. The purpose of the literature
question. I compared the literature against the codes I’d created, seeking validity in the
codes. I then analysed the responses and literature, before progressing to the writing up
stage.
37
Using Instagram for research was a learning process, given a lack of peer-reviewed
(2011b) study was the only major research I’d found which used a social media service
to post questions, using responses as part of their qualitative data set to analyse
face-to-face has the obvious limitation of not being able to source richness in non-verbal
and given smart device mobility it has geographical and cost benefits. Of the 294
30.27% response rate. The majority of the responses were within 48 hours of posting
the question, with many providing what appeared to be well developed and considered
answers. After posting the first 19 users with my question, my account was suspended
for 24 hours. I believe this was in breach of Instagram’s (2014) “Don’t Spam” condition
which includes making repetitive comments. As the question I had posed to these first
19 users was exactly the same, and all within minutes of each other, this was my logical
the day. As a result my account remained open and accessible and was not suspended
again. This behaviour could be viewed as a tacit tactic, altering my behaviour to side-
(Olszanowski, 2014).
38
I chose to collect data inside Instagram. Collecting respondent data through Instagram
Griffin, 2013). Collection and analysis of images is a visual research method (VRM).
According to Rose (2014), VRM has been considered effective in generating unique
In my research the author of the image, held power as the expert over the content. Their
images are an accurate record of material reality (Rose, 2014). Authors explain their
image, and are empowered by their expert position in the researcher/ participant
dynamic (Rose, 2014). Vivienne and Burgess (2013) consider Instagramming has three
weeks after their original posting. The user would then have been notified of the
comment. Being in the post-distribution phase, there was readiness of the author to
respond. I excluded from my research any image or user that was identifiable as under
18 years of age. Instagram allows users that are aged 13 years or above so this
practice was not certain. My aim when asking questions on Instagram, was a
a statement:
39
Adam Suess
Currently completing a research project on social media use and art galleries. More
www.adamsuess.com/research.
Posted on this URL was an information leaflet and ethics statement covering the
humanity, credibility and build rapport with other users (Hesse-Biber and Griffin, 2013). I
was particularly conscious, and unsure, of how users may feel when I posted my
question on their image. I realised the potential harm that could be experienced if they
felt someone had visited their profile for research purposes. Around the time I was
aspects of Facebook to study user reactions. Even though all images I sourced were
publicly available on Instagram, this did not remove the ethical consideration of
my profile. Hesse-Biber and Griffin (2013) argue the meaning and consequence of
lurking still requires further exploration. My study did not involve any collection of
personal information other than the publically available Instagram username, which I
7
http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2014/10/research-at-facebook/ (access 11 December 2014)
40
content will be within the scope of the research. The question of whether publically
available content is public, and may be observed without the authors consent, highlights
what Whiteman (2012) consider as the ethical destabilization between researcher and
researcher needs to reflexively balance ethical ‘control’ and ‘contingency’, including the
need to mediate assumptions on issues such as implied licence (Stern, 2004; Robards,
2013). Ethical decisions must be made in light of unclear private and public boundaries
on social media (Barnes, 2006). Adults should be in a better position to understand the
meaning of public, however even this cannot be assumed. Privacy on the internet is a
misunderstood concept, with many not understanding the reach of information posted to
the web (Litt, 2012). This is not made easier by the inherent implication in social media
privacy control, holding the individual responsible for managing privacy settings.
(Marwick and boyd, 2014). The emergence of digital media practices sees the
phenomenon of the privacy paradox. As Barnes (2006) considers, on one side there are
conservative and parochial legal and social mechanisms in place to protect identity;
and boyd (2014) argue the need for a re-conceptualized privacy model in the networked
era to address these blurred lines. Leng (2013) argues that posting information
available in the public domain, generally does not require informed consent for use in
research. As long as use of that data meets the existing standards of the institutional
ethics review board. Leng (2013) further warns if information may be traceable back to
41
is not breached.
Madge and O’Connor (2002) and Nip (2004) suggest respondents may divulge more
sensitive data when replying “in the comfort of their own homes or venue of their choice,
providing a sense of ‘safety’” (Hesse-Biber and Griffin, 2013: 55). Posting a question on
someone’s Instagram profile may increase the respondent‘s perception of safety within
respondent data validity, social desirability influence, and memory lapse (Litt, 2012).
Humans alter behaviour when they know they are being observed (Tufekci, 2014b). The
social desirability influence affects people which are part of a ‘common identity group’.
Leng (2013) considers people may respond in accordance with the norms of that group,
distorting their individual honesty. There was a time lag between the posting to
Instagram by the user, and the time I posed my question. In some cases several weeks,
supporting a research method, future empirical work may examine its validity as a
In this chapter I will present my findings. I am presenting the data without user
research as open as possible without compromising individual privacy. Using the coding
and themes emergent in the data, as I wrote the research findings I remained immersed
Sharing
participation (John, 2013; Marwick and boyd, 2014). Instagram’s principal function is to
facilitate sharing of images between users. As a paid ticketed exhibition, Falling Back to
Earth, was both exclusive and unique for those that attended. It is not surprising that 28
out of 89 respondent’s, referenced ‘sharing’ when asked why they posted an image
…I go to QAG GOMA a lot and think they have excellent exhibitions, so like to share
I’m an Art Teacher so loved this exhibition & decided to post this amazing piece to share
with others.
Sharing is an overloaded word in the context of social media (John, 2013). The concept
however it remains an under theorized concept, with differing logics making the term
multi-layered and complex (John, 2013). boyd (2006) conceptually considers individuals
you are interested maintaining friendship with me, you must be interested in the content
…I enjoyed it, so I shared it with my followers whom I know are of similar interests…
I posted the picture because I wanted an easy way to show those who follow me what I’d
seen.
I simply posted this photo because I thought the exhibit was fascinating and I wanted to
John (2013) supports an egotistic understanding of sharing; the individual sees their
own life as distinct from others. The distinctness or uniqueness drives one to share with
another, so they will come to know more about them (2013: 7). Users on Instagram are
not sharing tangible objects. The viewer gains from seeing the image, and the poster is
44
not left with less. Sharing in this framework has a mutually beneficial outcome. John
(2013) considers when we share the experience of ‘our world’ or ‘our life’ through social
media we are sharing fuzzy objects. These users show examples of sharing a fuzzy
object:
Is simple: to share the experience. I often post images from galleries to Instagram,
because I know that many people who follow me share my interests and might not be
I simply share images of my world on Instagram, the things I see and things that touch
me.
Sharing one’s experiences or life through Instagram is about communication rather than
(Grusin, 2010). One cannot share their world, life or experience; this form of sharing is
illusory, and lacks the multi-sensory tactility and cognitive condition of reality (Holloway-
Attaway, 2014). One only passes a digital archive, a trace of their unique perspective.
Viewed continuously may form an individual narrative. Or combined with what one
knows of the person’s offline identity, a meta-narrative. Sharing traces helps parties
more we share our lives and worlds with each other, the greater chance we may have to
I share things like this I like because there are people with similar tastes on here that
would appreciate it and may also show something to others that may not have had
capturing photos of places they’ve visited has been termed the hermeneutic cycle (Urry,
that which they have already heard or read about, proving the experience to others by
capturing their own image of that place (Thurlow and Jawroski, 2014). Whilst many see
irony in their portrayal as a typical tourist, others may be unaware of the mindless
collective, copying and repeating the behaviour of others (Thurlow and Jawroski, 2011).
Conversely, Larsen (2005) believes the hermeneutic model is too reductive and
Well I went to exhibit and wanted to show that I went to it so I shared it basically. It’s a bit of
a mindless thing in this day and age isn’t it? But I like it so go on.
...it was kind of the thing to do if you had gone.. If that makes sense? I know it sounds silly,
but when you go to something that everyone is going to you want to jump on the
bandwagon!
46
Imagined audience
Every individual in a communicative act has an imagined audience (Marwick and boyd,
used the term ‘friends’ or ‘followers’ to describe whom they believed they were posting
to. Others formed an abstract mental conceptualization of their audience (Litt, 2012):
...I wanted to let those people who, like me, had been putting it off…
Instagram may only rely on engagement to understand who is viewing their content;
likes, comments or re-posts giving some indication of quantity. This highlights the
abstract concept of the networked audience; not knowing who they are, or when they
are there (Marwick and boyd, 2011b). Hogan (2010) considers a user judges the lowest
common denominator of person that may view their content when posting. In this sense
‘everyone’ is within a range of those we are presenting an idealized version of self, and
“those who may find this front problematic” (Hogan, 2010: 383). This audience
mediation has been considered by Marwick and boyd (2011a). They term this
phenomenon a collapsed context, where audiences are flattened into one composition,
research to understand.
Space
spatialized. (Thurlow and Jawroski, 2011). The space created by the Falling Back to
It was also a very ‘photogenic’ installation with the space, light, distance, reflections.
The large expanse of white sand surrounding the lake was a critical part of the exhibit,
Users announced their physical presence by geotagging the Gallery location, and/or
posting an image of themselves at the exhibition. Telling the audience on social media
(Schwartz and Halegoua, 2014). According to Goffman (1959) people may emphasize
aspects they believe will present an idealized version of themselves to their audience.
…had to post a photograph to show everyone I had been to GOMA that day.
Telling people where you are, either directly or through adding a geotagged location,
may signal to others traces of your lifestyle (Barkhaus et al., 2008). Individual curated
blended identity (Schwartz and Halegoua, 2014). Telling people online you’ve been to
the individual’s idealized self (Schwartz and Halegoua, 2014). Collectively users
participating in this practice add to the polysemic meaning making of the gallery as a
place (Schwartz and Halegoua, 2014). One user employed the practice of hashtagging
Leaving digital traces is an abstract concept. By tracing self to place, the user structures
their own meta-spatial representation of reality (Schwartz and Halegoua, 2014). The
mediation between the digital space on Instagram, and the user offline may be viewed
agency of the user (Giddens, 1984; Kidder, 2009). The perceived space designed by
49
Instagram, and its appropriation by users, through their experience and interaction
Physically, the stamp would fade and wash off. The photo and post to Instagram, took a
taking the photo of their arm with the stamp, the physical and digital representations
were both perspectives of the same reality. The limitations of the physical, gave rise to
an assertion of new digital space by the user. The creation of new digital space,
lived by extension into a digital space (Hjorth and Pink, 2014). The experience of our
physical life changes when we partially live by proxy through a digital existence on
Instagram. There is a dialogical relationship between physical and digital, each shaping
the other in a recursive manner (Robinson, 2007; Bullingham and Vasconcelos, 2013).
Aesthetic experience
The modern approach to aesthetic experience seeks to create a democratic and neutral
experience:
…I wanted to be identified with having experienced the work and offer a personal
‘unique’ perspective.
I post IG photos to share with my friends and followers what I see, what I think abs how I
different ways. With no one objective understanding of art (Stecker, 1994) people may
knowing the art (Duh et al., 2014; Consoli, 2014). Respondents expressed traces of
The image I chose to post was designed to reflect some of the magnitude of this exhibit.
The large expanse of white sand surrounding the lake was a critical part of the exhibit,
creating negative space and stark contrast to the animated figures gathered at the
waters edge.
I posted this photo because I felt it represented the bizarreness of having a tree in the
gallery, but also showed people interacting and being themselves in a relaxed way
Aesthetic experience may involve interpretation of the artworks on display for many
exhibition visitors. People make associations with life experience to assist in their
construction of an interpretation (Duh et al., 2014). When asked why these respondents
(the art) …spoke to me of home. I grew up on a farm and have a connection to the land
I posted it because I felt a connection with it. I grew up in country QLD. Used to play
near or walk past piles of wood or "sleepers". My dad did a lot of fencing on the cattle
These users expressed a deep and meaningful association with the art, joining it to an
earlier life experience that emerged when faced with the art. A number of other users
within the data set, posted images of themselves interacting with the art; in particular
52
embodied acts of mimicry (Steier, 2014). Head on had a number of lifelike wolf
sculptures at floor level. Some users copied the actions of the sculptures, which they
posted to Instagram. One respondent explained the mimicry on display in their image:
My husband howling back at the wolf is like an analogy that you need to raise your
Like Thurlow and Jawroski’s (2011) example of Pisa Pushers, where people create
illusory images holding up the leaning tower of Pisa, as embodied acts of performance
or play. Embodied action at the Falling Back to Earth exhibition was observed on
Instagram, sometimes as repeat performances. The embodied action, in and around the
art, primarily took the form of selfies and posing. Of the 2,237 images selected in the
initial data set, 83 (3.7%) were coded as selfies and 71 (3.1%) showing some form of
posing. When asked why, one respondent who had posted to Instagram stated:
(2011) victorious stance, places self at the centre of an image, conquering the scene.
Like a victorious stance, a selfie and photo-bombing are momentary acts, appropriation
of the power of self over site. Like a bodily graffiti, capturing an enduring representation
53
or inscription within the place (2011: 19). Visitor posing is rich and complex in meaning.
…it also allowed us to interact with the artwork and create new meaning.
I like how the wolves are flying over my head like in a dream…
I could get in amongst the animals on their ascent and I really felt I could move with
them.
Other participants used Instagram to capture and display their observation, supporting
an interpretation of the art. Articulating a careful and detailed attention to the work, prior
The fishing line holding the exhibit in place is part of the science of disbelief my eye is
the wolves were very realistic and this whole exhibit with the wolves was a very powerful
exhibit. Makes one think about the fact that even though there is no physical wall, the
boundaries are still there and we are bound to them. There is no giving up, persistent we
must be like the wolves to break the invisible barriers of society to be free.
54
Aesthetic experience “enables imaginative simulation decoupled from the actual state of
the world” (Consoli, 2014: 40). Some participants reflected how Instagram captured
...we were kinda playing with the whole illusion of ‘touching the art exhibit’ and
I could get in amongst the animals on their ascent and I really felt I could move with
them.
Digital Curator
One of the uses of Instagram observed in this study, is digital curation by individual
users. Digital curators are mediators of social information, and good curation is seen as
displaying content that is interesting and relevant (Hogan, 2010). Instagram users may
curate aspects of their life, their ongoing unique perspective of the world, or a pre-
determined theme:
I simply share images of my world on Instagram, the things I see and things that touch
me.
Like other social media networks, Instagram structures a technology that facilitates
digital curation. The user choosing image based content to display to an audience, and
55
the curator sees things throughout the day, they can transfer an image quickly and
easily to their profile. A digital curator’s audience ranges from themselves, to selected
I enjoy sharing my finds with others and honour the artist who made the image possible.
realise how many view the images (Hogan, 2010). Likes, comments and followers
symbolise popularity on Instagram, and users may strategically post what they believe
will be engaging content to their audience (Marwick and boyd, 2011b). Digital curators
Even though I have few followers, when you hashtag # pics you often get likes and/or
I posted the hashtags so more people would see my photo than would without them.
Hashtags observed within my data set ranged from localised tags, such as the GOMA
statement (Bruns and Burgess, 2011). Hashtagging was practiced by some to ensure
56
acknowledgment of the artist behind the exhibition. One user also mentioned creating
When viewing and photographing art I hashtag the artist and the name of the piece (I did
#breathtaking.
I wanted to tag #qagoma so that they were aware of the image. Due credit.
overwhelming their audience with irrelevant content (Hogan, 2010). This may prove
difficult for many curators, particularly if they are curating their lived experience and not
an ongoing theme:
I think I like the idea of posting a token pic of (what I think) hip or fun things at the
moment.
...I use Instagram to put up pictures of things I bought or places I went or food I ate.
Curated content reflects the curator. It provides cues or signals into their perspective
(Lubar, 2014). Most people construct a perspective of the world in part through what
they see (Cobern, 1993), and Instagramming reflects archived moments of that
57
their mode of ‘creative incubation’ before posting to Instagram (Hjorth and Pink, 2014):
I also like to ‘review’ my images later to consider them a little more. I think we are guilty
of moving through our day so fast that it is nice to have the opportunity for visual
Hjorth and Pink (2014) highlight the transient state of mobile stillness (Bissell & Fuller,
2011), where transport places, like the ‘bus to work’, offers a user a time and place for
reflection. This post-hoc reflexivity (Thurlow and Jawroski, 2011), may exist in a co-
presence, the user physically on the bus whilst at the same time reflecting on their visit
describes it as being both ‘here and there’. The user acknowledged ‘moving through our
day so fast that it is nice to have the opportunity for visual reflection’. In this case the
bus has provided that place for incubation or reflection of their images prior to posting.
Conversely another participant found the instant production cycle more appealing:
From memory we were pressed for time. I posted the pic at the time I saw it very much
Curation on Instagram also reflects what John (2013) considers sharing to build positive
social relations. Instagram curators were found to pass specific facts and details about
the Falling Back to Earth exhibition to their audience. Information such as where the
58
exhibition was, when it was closing, details about the artist and artworks:
I like to credit the works I upload pics of in case anyone wants to look into it and find out
more.
People who hadn’t read the sign explaining what it represented might’ve learnt
something as well.
Instagram offers users an efficient and intuitive, digital version of what would have
historically been contained inside photo albums or journals. A visit to a paid ticketed
exhibition at the art gallery would, for most be a once only opportunity. It is
characteristic of being an experience worth remembering. Like Hjorth and Pink’s (2014)
study, some of our respondent’s showed taking photos and storing them on Instagram,
Also I like being able to return my love for the experience at the exhibition, it is a
keepsake.
If used regularly, each memento binds together to form a diarised, chronology of life
events and special moments. Further research would be useful to understand how
frequently users reflect on their posts to Instagram, and what effect this has on their
ongoing practice. Given the technological advancements in tracking people’s ‘daily life’,
I like looking back through my instagram as a sort of a life document, so there’s that…
Insta has mostly been my visual diary of art, contemplation and inspiration…
Hjorth and Pink’s (2014) research found Facebook users favoured the visual diary
…just like how I use Instagram to put up pictures of things I bought or places I went or
food I ate.
With our smartphones it is now normal practice to post pics and comments.
60
Putting your life on public display, what you ate, bought, and wore today, may build
authenticity, but shows less regard for the risks of mediating audience expectation
(Marwick and boyd, 2011b). In an ‘ideology of publicity’, people value more information
about others, but revealing too much information risks detriment in unpredictable ways
Communicating sentiment
Social media generally facilitates the public or private airing of consumer sentiment. As
an example, large e-commerce and travel websites offer customer driven review and
rating systems. Users form communities, and highlight positive or negative experiences
seen as a way of enhancing a digital reputation, and builds valuable social capital that
can be transferred into offline benefits (Hearn, 2010). Although one may not know the
other user offering the recommendation, there are imagined communities and
Also I find it helpful when others ‘spread the word’ about a show that is on.
Hashtagging is similar Instagram practice that was used by the exhibition visitors to
…I like these hash tags to be used so that others can look at the pics off a hash tag to
...they might be inspired enough to look up the exhibit and research it (hence the hash
tags).
62
CONCLUSION
Visitors to art exhibitions use Instagram in complex and meaningful ways. Sharing was
a recurrent and multi-purposed behaviour observed in this study. Visitors to Falling Back
to Earth shared what they saw and what they experienced on Instagram. Instagram
facilitated the promotion and recommendation of the exhibition; users encouraging their
minimum their friends, and a maximum the whole world. Instagram is both a singular
large community and collection of smaller communities. The individuals that comprise
the smaller communities are not necessarily known to each other outside of that space.
They communicate and build relationships primarily through image sharing. The
hashtag #qagoma built a community around the GOMA, where individuals opted-in by
adding it to their post. Even non-contributors to the image archive participate in the
community by searching for others images using the hashtag. The community acts as a
place where individuals see their unique opinion as meaningful to others. Passing
endorsement and authentic opinion to others like a form of charity. Like offline
communities, participation benefits both the community and the individual. Individuals
using #qagoma attach the identity of the GOMA to themselves, as an exhibition to their
audience.
interpretations, deep and meaningful connections to the art, and expressed traces of
this experience on their Instagram profile. Such traces were well developed and
considered, explicitly articulating a textual and visual interpretation. There are blurred
63
they form a dialogical relationship and are never separate. Visiting a gallery with friends,
or being there in the company of strangers, influences what we might see (vom Lehn et
Users not only photographed the art, they photographed themselves interacting with the
art. This embodied action, shared with others a presence and experience of having
Instagram users in this study framed idealized aspects of themselves through sharing,
self. There were examples of digital reputation building, and posting affective feedback
whom people perceive they are sharing with. Similarly the concept of sharing fuzzy
objects such as one’s ‘life’ or ‘world’ require further development. An important question
to ask is if our goal in sharing fuzzy objects on Instagram is to build positive social
work (John, 2013). We share our experience and our life on Instagram, without really
between Instagram and knowing art (Consoli, 2014). Participants in this study displayed
interpretation and judgement of the objects before them (Duh et al., 2014; Consoli,
2014). This research found users engaging in the hermeneutic cycle, visiting the
exhibition and taking a photo to show others. Feeling socially obliged to ‘jump on the
bandwagon’, do as others were doing, and prove they were there. There were acts of
mimicry and imagined play, with other visitors and the art. Selfies acted as modes of
place appropriation, empowering physical self over site. Instagram through its user
a duality of structure between the Instagram environment and their physical experience.
The individual’s agency enabled by the structure of Instagram, at the same time limited
by it. Instagram used opportunistically to take temporary physical realities and transform
representations being of the same reality. Visitors to Falling Back to Earth left traces of
Geotagging presence, and photographing their image at the exhibition, users connected
65
the exhibition to their identity, in acts of impression management. Curating the GOMA
are multi-directional, the individual gains from tracing a place to their identity, and the
creative incubation. Users within the cycle reflexively and dialogically mediated physical
embodiment and digital presence. Co-presence is an abstract area, and needs further
research to qualify. As mobile connection speed becomes faster we share more. From
text to images, to video, to live streaming, the physical and digital become closer. By
by engagement and reflection. Reflecting on all images represented within their profile.
Each potentially a different story or trophy, a narrative snapshot. Hashtagging was also
found to be a method used by individuals to add meaning to their post, using an extra-
textual community framed code. Art exhibition visitors used Instagram as a quasi-
values, yet is also parochial and hegemonic as a corporate entity (Olszanowski, 2014).
and governments all afforded the same type and character of space. Communication is
channelled from the bottom-up (Bruns and Burgess, 2011). This was evidenced by the
number of users who posted their unique individual perspective of the art at the
66
(Burnham, 1994).
Instagram has potential for future researchers as a method of contact given what I
found was a positive response rate. From a methodological perspective tagging (hash
and geo) facilitated efficiency in my research. Without users tagging their posts this
research would not have been possible, certainly not to this scale. Tagging on
Instagram has the practical benefit of cataloguing posts in a chronological order, and
makes them easily searchable either through Instagram or a third party API application.
in the world. Geotag data collection offers researchers studying place representation
and place meaning making, a cost effective method to reach data. Hashtag searching
on Instagram is not without its research risks (e.g. dynamic content and user expertise
level) (Highfield and Leaver, 2015), searching by tags also has methodological sampling
effective. The 89 responses I received from the 294 posted questions demonstrated a
quality level of engagement available in the Instagram space. Except for the 24 hour
suspension, my collection of data did not draw any negative attention from Instagram’s
Community Guidelines. In my case I asked only one question to users, although there is
the opportunity to probe with further questions on Instagram once you’ve entered a
(Marwick and boyd, 2011a; Olszanowski, 2014). More Instagram research is needed,
both as a methodology and examining user practices and experiences (Highfield and
Leaver, 2015).
There are outstanding ethical considerations requiring development. The pace and flow
emergent practices. Lurking, the public domain, informed consent and risks of
participant harm were all identified as ethical considerations in this research. However
further empirical research is required to give the community, both public and academia,
greater certainty in practice. The privacy paradox illustrates the margin between
community standards of privacy and individual user practice. The dominance of Twitter
functionality is relatively easy and gives rise to big data samples, which in turn seek to
balancing this work. At a practical level, this research is expected to offer insight to
educators, curators and social media professionals. Positive visitor engagement and the
promotional benefits of community ‘word of mouth’ are beneficial to any art exhibition.
68
REFERENCES
Andrejevic, M. (2013) Infoglut: how too much information is changing the way we think
Baker, A.J. (2009) ‘Mick or Keith: Blended identity of online rock fans’, Identity in the
Barnes, S. (2006) ‘A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States’, First
Monday 11(9).
Bernstein, M.S., Bakshy, E., Burke, M. and Karrer, B. (2013). ‘Quantifying the invisible
Borden, I. (2001) Skateboarding, space, and the city: Architecture and the body. New
York: Berg.
69
boyd, d. (2006) ‘Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8: Writing community into being on social
boyd, d. (2007) ‘Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked
Publics in Teenage Social Life’ In Buckingham, D. (ed) Youth, Identity and Digital
boyd, d. (2014) It’s Complicated: the social lives of networked teens, New Haven and
Brake, D R. (2012) ‘Who Do They Think They’re Talking To? Framings of the Audience
Bruner, J. (1991) ‘The Narrative Construction of Reality’, Critical Inquiry 18(1): 1-21.
Bruns, A. and Burgess, J. (2011) ‘The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc
Bullingham, L. and Vasconcelos, A.C. (2013) ‘The presentation of self in the online
world: Goffman and the study of online identities’, Journal of Information Science 39:
101-112.
Burgess, J. (2011) ‘The iPhone Moment, the Apple Brand and the Creative Consumer:
From ‘Hackability and Usability’ to Cultural Generativity’. In Hjorth, L., Burgess, J. and
Burnham, R. (1994) ‘If you don’t stop, you don’t see anything’, Teachers College
on Aesthetic Experience’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 72(1): 37-55.
71
Deller, R.A. (2011) ‘Twittering on: Audience research and participation using Twitter’,
2015]
Duh, M., Zupančič, T. and Čagran, B. (2014) ‘Development of Art Appreciation in 11–14
year-old Students’, International Journal of Art & Design Education 33(2): 208-222.
Dunbar, R.I.M. (1998) ‘The social brain hypothesis’, Evolutionary Anthropology 6: 178-
190.
Edmonds, E., Bilda, Z. and Muller, L. (2009) ‘Artist, evaluator and curator: three
20(3): 141-151.
Eisner, E.W. and Dobbs, S.M. (1988) ‘Silent Pedagogy: How Museums Help Visitors
Ekstrand, V.S. and Silver, D. (2014) ‘Remixing, Reposting, and Reblogging: Digital
Media, Theories of the Image, and Copyright Law’, Visual Communication Quarterly
21(2): 96-105.
Goffman, E. (1959) The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
Gordon, E. and De Souza e Silva, A. (2011) Net Locality: Why Location Matters in a
Hearn, A. (2010) ‘Structuring feeling: Web 2.0, online ranking and rating, and the digital
Methods Research: Problems and Prospects’, Journal of Mixed Methods Research 7(1):
43-61.
Hjorth, L. and Burgess, J.E. (2014) ‘Intimate banalities: the emotional currency of
shared camera phone images during the Queensland flood disaster’. In Goggin, G. and
Hjorth, L (eds) The Routledge Companion to Mobile Media. London: Routledge (In
Press).
73
Hjorth, L. and Pink, S. (2014) ‘New visualities and the digital wayfarer:
Reconceptualizing camera phone photography and locative media’, Mobile Media &
Hogan, B. (2010) ‘The Presentation of Self in the Age of Social Media: Distinguishing
Performances and Exhibitions Online’, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 30:
377-386.
and Moby-Dick’, Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media
Hostetter, A.B. and Alibali, M.W. (2008) ‘Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated
of Instagram Photo Content and User Types. In Eighth International AAAI Conference
Hubard, O. (2014) ‘Concepts as Context: Thematic Museum Education and its Influence
on Meaning Making’, International Journal of Art & Design Education 33: 103–115.
74
Jaworski, A. and Thurlow, C. (2011) ‘Tracing Place, Locating Self: Embodiment and
Jewitt, C. (ed) Handbook of Multimodal Discourse Analysis, London and New York:
Routledge.
John, N.A. (2013) ‘Sharing and Web 2.0: The emergence of a keyword’, New Media &
Kahn, M. (2003) ‘Tahiti: The ripples of a myth on the shores of the imagination’,
Kennedy, L., Naaman, M., Ahern, S., Nair, R. and Rattenbury, T. (2007) How flickr
helps us make sense of the world: context and content in community-contributed media
York: ACM.
Kidder, J.L. (2009) ‘Appropriating the city: space, theory, and bike messengers’, Theory
Leng, H.K. (2013) ‘Methodological Issues in Using Data from Social Networking Sites’,
Litt, E. (2012) ‘Knock, Knock. Who's There? The Imagined Audience, Journal of
Madge, C. and O’Connor, H. (2002) ‘Online with e-mums: Exploring the Internet as a
Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience’, New Media & Society 13(1): 114-
133.
Marwick, A. and boyd, d. (2011b) ‘To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter’,
17(2): 139–158.
Marwick, A. and boyd, d. (2014) ‘Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context
Heinemann.
Miller, H. (1995) The Presentation of Self in Electronic Life: Goffman on the Internet. In
University of London.
Nip, J.Y.M. (2004) ‘The queer sisters and its electronic bulletin board: A study of the
Internet for social movement mobilization’, Information, Communication & Society 7(1):
23-49.
experience with museum technologies. In ECIS 2009 Proceedings, Paper 395, Verona:
Italy.
Papacharissi, Z. (2009) ‘The virtual geographies of social networks’, New Media and
Pettit, M. (2011) ‘The con man as model organism: the methodological roots of Erving
Pierroux, P., Krange, I. and Sem, I. (2011) ‘Bridging contexts and interpretations: Mobile
blogging on art museum field trips’, MedieKultur: Journal of media and communication
50: 30-47.
Posner, J. (1978) ‘Erving Goffman: His Presentation of Self’, Philosophy of the Social
Sciences, 8: 67-78.
Pyyry, N. (2013) ‘Sensing with photography and thinking with photographs in research
Quan-Haase, A. and Martin, K. (2013) ‘Digital curation and the networked audience of
urban events: Expanding La Fiesta de Santo Tomás from the physical to the virtual
http://www.qagoma.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/168787/Annual_Report_201
Raffel, S. (2013) ‘The everyday life of the self: Reworking early Goffman’, Journal of
Robinson, L. (2007) ‘The cyberself: the self-ing project goes online, symbolic interaction
Rose, G. (2014) ‘On the relation between ‘visual research methods’ and contemporary
Rowe, C. (2009) ‘E-mail play and accelerated change’. In Rowe, C. and Wyss, E.L.
(eds) Language and New Media: Linguistic, Cultural, and Technological Evolutions.
Russo, A., Watkins, J., Kelly, L. and Chan, S. (2008) ‘Participatory Communication with
19(3): 319-344.
http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/09/1461444814531364.full.pdf [Last
Silva, T.H., de Melo, P.O.S.V., Almeida, J.M., Salles, J.F.S. and Loureiro, A.A.F. (2013)
Stecker, R. (1994). Art Interpretation, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
52(2): 193-206.
Publishing.
Buckingham, D. (ed) Youth, identity, and digital media Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
80
Benjamins.
494.
Tufekci, Z. (2014b) Big Questions for Social Media Big Data: Representativeness,
Turkle, S. (1995) Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York:
Vivienne, S. and Burgess, J. (2013) ‘The remediation of the personal photograph and
279-298.
81
11: 209-220.
of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Paris: ACM Press.
Springer.
Whitty, M.T. (2008) ‘Revealing the ‘real’ me, searching for the ‘actual’ you:
1707–1723.
Ventzislavov, R. (2014) ‘Idle Arts: Reconsidering the Curator’, The Journal of Aesthetics
vom Lehn, D., Heath, C. and Hindmarsh, J. (2001) ‘Exhibiting Interaction: Conduct and
Vrotsou, K., Ynnerman, A. and Cooper, M. (2014) ‘Are we what we do? Exploring group
13(3): 232-247.