Mapping the social implications of platform algorithms for LGBTQ+ communities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33621/jdsr.v5i4.162Keywords:
algorithms, digital platforms, LGBTQ+ communitiesAbstract
LGBTQ+ communities were among the first to appropriate the Internet to experiment with their identities and socialize outside of mainstream society. Recently, those platforms have implemented algorithmic systems that curate, exploit, and predict user practices and identities. Yet, the social implications that platform algorithms raise for LGBTQ+ communities remain largely unexplored. At the intersection of media and communication studies, science and technology studies, as well as gender and sexuality studies, this paper maps the main issues that platform algorithms raise for LGBTQ+ users and analyzes their implications for social justice and equity. To do so, it identifies and discusses public controversies through a review and analysis of journalistic articles. Our analysis points to five important algorithmic issues that affect the lives of LGBTQ+ users in ways that require additional scrutiny from researchers, policymakers, and tech developers alike: the ability for sorting algorithms to identify, categorize, and predict the sexual orientation and/or gender identity of users; the role that recommendation algorithms play in mediating LGBTQ+ identities, kinship, and cultures; the development of automated anti-LGBTQ+ speech detection/filtering software and the collateral harm caused to LGBTQ+ users; the power struggles over the nature and effects of visibility afforded to LGBTQ+ issues/people online; and the overall enactment of cisheteronormative biases through platform affordances.
References
Abreu, R. L., & Kenny, M. C. (2018). Cyberbullying and LGBTQ youth: A systematic literature review and recommendations for prevention and intervention. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 11(1), 81-97.
Adam, B. D. (2015). Homophobia and heterosexism. In Ritzer, G. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, Blackwell Publishing, 2154-2157.
Albury, K., Dietzel, C., Pym, T., Vivienne, S., & Cook, T. (2020). Not your unicorn: Trans dating app users’ negotiations of personal safety and sexual health. Health Sociology Review, 1-15.
Ananny, M. (2016). Toward an ethics of algorithms: Convening, observation, probability, and timeliness. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 93-117.
Anderson, A., & Roth, A. L. (2020). Queer erasure: Internet browsing can be biased against LGBTQ people, new exclusive research shows. Index on Censorship, 49(1), 75-77.
Ayoub, P. M., & Brezinska, O. (2015). Caught in a web? The Internet and deterritorialization of LGBT activism. In Paternotte, D. & M. Tremblay (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Lesbian and Gay Activism, New York: Routledge, 225-243.
Baker, P., & Potts, A. (2013). ‘Why do white people have thin lips?’ Google and the perpetuation of stereotypes via auto-complete search forms. Critical discourse studies, 10(2), 187-204.
Barnhurst, K. (2007). Visibility as paradox: Representation and simultaneous contrast. In K. Barnhurst (Ed.), Media Queered: Visibility and its Discontents, pp. 1-22. Peter Lang.
Beer, D. (2009). Power through the algorithm? Participatory web cultures and the technological unconscious. New Media & Society, 11(6), 985-1002.
Benjamin, R. (2019). Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. John Wiley & Sons.
Bivens, R. (2017). The gender binary will not be deprogrammed: Ten years of coding gender on Facebook. New Media & Society, 19(6), 880-898.
Bivens, R., & Haimson, O. L. (2016). Baking gender into social media design: How platforms shape categories for users and advertisers. Social Media+ Society, 2(4), DOI: 2056305116672486.
Blackwell, L., Dimond, J., Schoenebeck, S., & Lampe, C. (2017). Classification and its consequences for online harassment. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1, 1-19.
Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (2000). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge: MIT press.
Bruns, A. (2019). Are filter bubbles real?. John Wiley & Sons.
Bucher, T. (2018). If... then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2018). The Affordances of Social Media Platforms. In Sloane, L. & A. Quan-Haase. (Eds), SAGE Handbook of social media, SAGE, 233-253.
Butler, J. (1990). Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
Byron, P. (2019). ‘How could you write your name below that?’ The queer life and death of Tumblr. Porn Studies, 6(3), 336-349.
Campbell, J. E. (2005). Outing PlanetOut: surveillance, gay marketing and internet affinity portals. New Media & Society, 7(5), 663-683.
Cardon, D. (2015). A quoi rêvent les algorithmes. Nos vies à l'heure: Nos vies à l’heure des big data. Paris: Le Seuil.
Chartier, L. (2003). Mesurer l'insaisissable: Méthode d'analyse du discours de presse. PUQ.
Cheney-Lippold, J. (2017). We are data. In We Are Data. New York University Press.
Cho, A. (2018). Default publicness: Queer youth of color, social media, and being outed by the machine. New Media & Society, 20(9), 3183-3200.
Cobbe, J. (2020). Algorithmic censorship by social platforms. Philosophy & Technology, 1-28.
Cohn, J. (2016). My TiVo thinks I’m gay: Algorithmic culture and its discontents. Television & New Media, 17(8), 675-690.
Crawford, K. (2016a). Can an algorithm be agonistic? Ten scenes from life in calculated publics. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 77-92.
Crawford, K. (2016b). Artificial Intelligence’s White Guy Problem. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/opinion/sunday/artificial-intelligences-white-guy-problem.html?_r=0
Crawford, K., & Gillespie, T. (2016). What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint. New Media & Society, 18(3), 410-428.
Daniels, J. (2013). Race and racism in Internet studies: A review and critique. New Media & Society, 15(5), 695-719.
de Filippi, P. (2016). Gouvernance algorithmique: Vie privée et autonomie individuelle à l’ère des Big Data. In P. De Filippi & D. Bourcier (Eds.), Open Data & Data Protection : Nouveaux défis pour la vie privée. Paris: Mare & Martin, 1-22.
DeNardis, L., & Hackl, A. M. (2016). Internet control points as LGBT rights mediation. Information, Communication & Society, 19(6), 753-770.
Duguay, S. (2016). Constructing public space|“legit can’t wait for# toronto# worldpride!”: Investigating the twitter public of a large-scale LGBTQ festival. International Journal of Communication, 10, 25.
Duguay, S. (2016). Investigating the Twitter public of a large-scale LGBTQ festival. International Journal of Communication, 10, 274-298.
Duguay, S. (2019). “Running the Numbers”: Modes of Microcelebrity Labor in Queer Women’s Self-Representation on Instagram and Vine. Social Media+ Society, 5(4), DOI: 2056305119894002.
Duguay, S., Burgess, J., & Suzor, N. (2020). Queer women’s experiences of patchwork platform governance on Tinder, Instagram, and Vine. Convergence, 26(2), 237-252.
Elipe, P., de la Oliva Muñoz, M., & Del Rey, R. (2018). Homophobic bullying and cyberbullying: Study of a silenced problem. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(5), 672-686.
Evans, D. T. (2007). Sexual citizenship. In Ritzer, G. (Ed.), The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
Ferris, L., & Duguay, S. (2020). Tinder’s lesbian digital imaginary: Investigating (im)permeable boundaries of sexual identity on a popular dating app. New Media & Society, 22(3), 489-506.
Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir. Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1978). Histoire de la sexualité, volume 1: La Volonté de savoir. Gallimard.
Fredenburg, J. N. (2020). YouTube as an Ally of Convenience: The Platform's Building and Breaking with the LGBTQ+ Community, Georgetown University.
Friedman, B., & Kahn Jr, P. H. (2003). Human values, ethics, and design. In Jacko, J.A. (Ed.), The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1177-1201.
Garcia, M. (2016). Racist in the machine: The disturbing implications of algorithmic bias. World Policy Journal, 33(4), 111-117.
Geerts, E., & Rahbari, L. (2022). Gender, Sexuality, and Embodiment in Digital Spheres. Connecting Intersectionality and Digitality. Journal of Digital Social Research, 4(3).
Gerrard, Y., & Thornham, H. (2020). Content moderation: Social media’s sexist assemblages. new media & society, 22(7), 1266-1286.
Giffney, N., & O'Rourke, M. (Eds.). (2016). The Ashgate Research Companion to Queer Theory. New York: Routledge.
Gillespie, T. (2010). The politics of platforms. New Media & Society, 12(3), 347-364.
Gillespie, T. (2012). Can an algorithm be wrong? Limn, 1(2), n.p.
Gillespie, T. (2017). Algorithmically recognizable: Santorum’s Google problem, and Google’s Santorum problem. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 63-80.
Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet. Yale University Press.
Gillespie, T., & Seaver, N. (2016). Critical algorithm studies: A reading list. Social Media Collective.
Gray, M. L. (2009). “Queer Nation is dead/long live Queer Nation”: The politics and poetics of social movement and media representation. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 26(3), 212-236.
Grison, T., & Julliard, V. (2021). Les enjeux de la modération automatisée sur les réseaux sociaux numériques: les mobilisations LGBT contre la loi Avia. Communication, technologies et développement, (10).
Hanckel, B., Vivienne, S., Byron, P., Robards, B., & Churchill, B. (2019). ‘That’s not necessarily for them’: LGBTIQ+ young people, social media platform affordances and identity curation. Media, Culture & Society, 41(8), 1261-1278.
Helmond, A. (2015). The platformization of the web: Making web data platform ready. Social Media+ Society, 1(2), 1-11.
Hoffmann, A. L. (2019). Where fairness fails: data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse. Information, Communication & Society, 22(7), 900-915.
Introna, L. D. (2016). Algorithms, governance, and governmentality: On governing academic writing. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 17-49.
Kafer, G., & Grinberg, D. (2019). Queer Surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 17(5), 592-601.
Khoja-Moolji, S. (2015). Becoming an “intimate publics”: Exploring the affective intensities of hashtag feminism. Feminist media studies, 15(2), 347-350.
Kokas, A. (2022). Data Trafficking and the International Risks of Surveillance Capitalism: The Case of Grindr and China. Television & New Media, 15274764221137250.
Latzer, M., Hollnbuchner, K., Just, N., & Saurwein, F. (2016). The economics of algorithmic selection on the Internet. In Bauer, J. & M. Latzer (Eds.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, Edward Elgar Publishing.
Lingel, J. (2020). Dazzle camouflage as queer counter conduct. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 1367549420902805.
Lingel, J., & Golub, A. (2015). In face on Facebook: Brooklyn’s drag community and sociotechnical practices of online communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(5), 536-553.
Lingiardi, V., Carone, N., Semeraro, G., Musto, C., D'amico, M., & Brena, S. (2019). Mapping Twitter hate speech towards social and sexual minorities: A lexicon-based approach to semantic content analysis. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-11.
Lucero, L. (2017). Safe spaces in online places: Social media and LGBTQ youth. Multicultural Education Review, 9(2), 117-128.
Lyon, D. (2002). Surveillance Studies: Understanding visibility, mobility and the phenetic fix. Surveillance & society, 1(1), 1-7.
Lyon, D. (2005). Surveillance as social sorting: Computer codes and mobile bodies. In Surveillance as social sorting (pp. 27-44). Routledge.
MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (1985). The social shaping of technology, Buckingham: Open University Press.
Mainardi, A., & Pavan, E. (2020). LGBTQI Online. In Bachmann, I., Cardo, V., Moorti, S., Scarcelli, C.M. & K. Ross (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Gender, Media, and Communication, Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 1-8.
Marciano, A., & Antebi-Gruszka, N. (2020). Offline and online discrimination and mental distress among lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals: The moderating effect of LGBTQ Facebook use. Media Psychology, DOI: 10.1080/15213269.2020.1850295
Marres, N. (2015). Why map issues? On controversy analysis as a digital method. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 40(5), 655-686.
Massanari, A. (2017). #Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society, 19(3), 329-346.
Mendes, K., Ringrose, J., & Keller, J. (2018). # MeToo and the promise and pitfalls of challenging rape culture through digital feminist activism. European Journal of Women's Studies, 25(2), 236-246.
Milan, S. (2015). When algorithms shape collective action: Social media and the dynamics of cloud protesting. Social Media+ Society, 1(2), 2056305115622481.
Musiani, F. (2013). Governance by algorithms. Internet Policy Review, 2(3), 1-8.
Musiani, F. (2018). L’invisible qui façonne. Études d’infrastructure et gouvernance d’Internet. Tracés. Revue de Sciences humaines, (35), 161-176.
Myles, D. (2022). Grindr? It’s a ‘Blackmailer’s Goldmine’! The Weaponization of Queer Data Publics amid the US-China Trade Conflict. Sexualities: Special Issue on Sexual Datafication.
Myles, D. (2020). Les rencontres amoureuses et sexuelles au temps des algorithmes: Une analyse comparative de Grindr et Tinder. In Piazzesi, C., Blais, M., Lavigne, J. & C. Lavoie Mongrain (Eds), Intimités et sexualités contemporaines: changements sociaux, transformations des pratiques et des representations, University of Montreal Press, 73-90.
Myles, D., & Lewis, K. (2019). Constructing Injustice Symbols in Contemporary Trans Rights Activisms. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning, (3-4), 24-42.
Napoli, P. M. (2013). The algorithm as institution: Toward a theoretical framework for automated media production and consumption. In Media in Transition Conference, Fordham University Schools of Business, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1-36.
Nash, C. J. (2013). The age of the “post-mo”? Toronto’s gay village and a new generation. Geoforum, 49, 243-252.
Navar-Gill, A., & Stanfill, M. (2018). “We shouldn't have to trend to make you listen”: Queer Fan Hashtag Campaigns as Production Interventions. Journal of Film and Video, 70(3-4), 85-100.
Nissenbaum, H. (2005). Values in technical design. In Mitcham, C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics. London: MacMillan, 66-70.
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression. New York University Press.
Oliva, T. D., Antonialli, D. M., & Gomes, A. (2020). Fighting Hate Speech, Silencing Drag Queens? Artificial Intelligence in Content Moderation and Risks to LGBTQ Voices Online. Sexuality & Culture, 1-33, DOI:10.1007/s12119-020-09790-w.
Phillips, D. J., & Cunningham, C. (2007). Queering surveillance research. Queer Online: Media Technology and Sexuality, 31-44.
Pilipets, E., & Paasonen, S. (2020). Nipples, memes, and algorithmic failure: NSFW critique of Tumblr censorship. New Media & Society, 1461444820979280.
Pullen, C., & Cooper, M. (Eds.). (2010). LGBT identity and online new media. London: Routledge.
Ramirez, J. L., Gonzalez, K. A., & Galupo, M. P. (2018). “Invisible during my own crisis”: Responses of LGBT people of color to the Orlando shooting. Journal of homosexuality, 65(5), 579-599.
Renninger, B. J. (2018). Grindr killed the gay bar, and other attempts to blame social technologies for urban development. Journal of Homosexuality, 66(12), 1736-1755.
Richards, L., & Morse, J. M. (2012). Readme First for a User's Guide to Qualitative Methods. London: Sage.
Richardson, D. (2017). Rethinking sexual citizenship. Sociology, 51(2), 208-224.
Robards, B. J., Churchill, B., Vivienne, S., Hanckel, B., & Byron, P. (2018). Twenty years of ‘cyberqueer’: The enduring significance of the Internet for young LGBTIQ+ people. In Aggleton, P. et al. (Eds.), Youth, Sexuality and Sexual citizenship, Routledge, 151-167.
Schram, B. (2019). Accidental orientations: Rethinking queerness in archival times. Surveillance & Society, 17(5), 602-617.
Seaver, N. (2017). Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data & Society, 4(2), DOI: 2053951717738104.
Sender, K. (2018). The gay market is dead, long live the gay market: From identity to algorithm in predicting consumer behavior. Advertising & Society Quarterly, 18(4).
Simpson, E., & Semaan, B. (2021). For You, or For ‘You’? Everyday LGBTQ+ Encounters with TikTok. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4, 1-34.
Sismondo, S. (2010). An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies (Vol. 1). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Southerton, C., Marshall, D., Aggleton, P., Rasmussen, M. L., & Cover, R. (2020). Social media, content classification and LGBTQ sexual citizenship. New Media & Society, 23(5), 920-938.
Star, S. L. (1999). The Ethnography of Infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 377-391.
Suchman, L. (2008). Feminist STS and the Sciences of the Artificial. In Hackett, E.J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M., Wajcman, J. & A. Giddens. The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, New York: Sage, 139-164.
Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colo. Tech. LJ, 13, 203.
van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & society, 12(2), 197-208.
Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1), 143-152.
Werbin, Kenneth C., Mark Lipton, and Matthew J. Bowman. "The contextual integrity of the closet: Privacy, data mining and outing Facebook’s algorithmic logics." Queer Studies in Media & Popular Culture 2.1 (2017): 29-47.
Wilkinson, W. W., & Berry, S. D. (2020). Together they are Troy and Chase: Who supports demonetization of gay content on YouTube? Psychology of Popular Media, 9(2), 224.
Wood, D. M., & Monahan, T. (2019). Platform surveillance. Surveillance & society, 17(1/2), 1-6.
Woods, H., & McVey, J. A. (2016). # BlackLivesMatter as A Case Study in the Politics of Digital Media: Algorithms, Hashtag Publics, and Organizing Protest Online. Teaching Media Quarterly, 4(1).
Yang, G. (2016). Narrative agency in hashtag activism: The case of# BlackLivesMatter. Media and communication, 4(4), 13.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power: Barack Obama's books of 2019. Profile books.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 David Myles, Stefanie Duguay, Lucia Flores Echaiz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
