Algorithms, Dashboards and Datafication: A Critical Evaluation of Social Media Monitoring

  • Ivo Furman
Part of the Dynamics of Virtual Work book series (DVW)


In this chapter, Furman provides an overview on social media monitoring technologies and their relevance to the wider discussions on datafication and informational capitalism. In the age of the informational capitalism, the capacity to leverage emotional commitment is crucial to the valuation of a brand and for attracting a much higher investor valuation on global markets. For this, marketing and public relations strategies have turned to the affordances offered by networked interactive technologies. This has created new opportunities as well as new risks. To control risks associated with using networked interactive technologies to generate engagement, organizations have begun to rely on social media monitoring services (SMM).


  1. Anderson, C. (2008). The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired. Retrieved from
  2. Andrejevic, M. (2011). The work that affective economics does. Cultural Studies, 25(4–5), 604–620. Scholar
  3. Andrejevic, M., & Burdon, M. (2015). Defining the sensor society. Television & New Media, 16(1), 19–36. Scholar
  4. Arvidsson, A., & Colleoni, E. (2012). Value in informational capitalism and on the internet. The Information Society, 28(3), 135–150. Scholar
  5. Asur, S., & Huberman, B. A. (2010). Predicting the future with social media (pp. 492–499). IEEE.
  6. Bartlett, J., & Tkacz, N. (2016). Governance by dashboard. A policy paper. Demos. Retrieved from
  7. Beaton, B. (2016). How to respond to data science: Early data criticism by Lionel Trilling. Information & Culture: A Journal of History, 51(3), 352–372. Scholar
  8. Bodle, R. (2011). Regimes of sharing: Open APIs, interoperability, and Facebook. Information, Communication & Society, 14(3), 320–337. Scholar
  9. Bollier, D., & Communications and Society Program (Aspen Institute), A. I. R. on I. T. (2010). The promise and peril of big data. Washington: Aspen Institute, Communications and Society Program.Google Scholar
  10. Borra, E., & Rieder, B. (2014). Programmed method: Developing a toolset for capturing and analyzing tweets. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(3), 262–278. Scholar
  11. Bowerman, M. (2010, December 7). Financial risk analysis 2.0: A win-win model for shareholders and communities. Social Finance. Retrieved from
  12. boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. Scholar
  13. Bucher, T. (2013). Objects of intense feeling. Computational Culture. Retrieved from
  14. Couldry, N., Fotopoulou, A., & Dickens, L. (2016). Real social analytics: A contribution towards a phenomenology of a digital world: Real social analytics. The British Journal of Sociology, 67(1), 118–137. Scholar
  15. Crawford, K. (2016). Can an algorithm be agonistic? Ten scenes from life in calculated publics. Science, Technology & Human Values, 41(1), 77–92. Scholar
  16. Fan, W., & Gordon, M. D. (2014). The power of social media analytics. Communications of the ACM, 57(6), 74–81. Scholar
  17. Fensel, D., Leiter, B., & Stavrakantonakis, I. (2012). Social media monitoring. Innsbruck: Semantic Technology Institute. Retrieved from
  18. Floridi, L. (2012). Big data and their epistemological challenge. Philosophy & Technology, 25(4), 435–437. Scholar
  19. Fuchs, C. (2010). Labor in informational capitalism and on the internet. The Information Society, 26(3), 179–196. Scholar
  20. Gungor, Z., & Oflazer, K. (1995). Parsing Turkish using the lexical functional grammar formalism. Machine Translation, 10(4), 293–319. Scholar
  21. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kitchin, R. (2014). Big data. In R. Kitchin (Ed.), The data revolution (pp. 48–67). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Kozinets, R. V., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A. C., & Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing, 74(2), 71–89. Scholar
  24. Langlois, G., McKelvey, F., Elmer, G., & Werbin, G. (2009). Mapping commercial Web 2.0 worlds: Towards a new critical ontogenesis. Fibreculture. Retrieved from
  25. Latour, B. (2007, April 6). Beware, your imagination leaves digital traces. Times Higher Literary Supplement. Retrieved from
  26. Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work and think. London: Murray.Google Scholar
  27. Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39–41. Scholar
  28. Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2). Scholar
  29. Morozov, E. (2013). The real privacy problem. MIT Technology Review. Retrieved from
  30. Oflazer, K. (1995). Two-level description of Turkish morphology. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 9(2), 137–148. Scholar
  31. Ozel, B., Yildirim, S., & Eren, A. (2011). Exploring tweet patterns to identify and analyse online political debates. In Social technologies ‘11: ICT for social transformations. Conference proceedings, 2011. ISBN 978-9955-19-378-4.Google Scholar
  32. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy & Leadership, 32(3), 4–9. Scholar
  33. Puschmann, C., & Ausserhofer, J. (2017). Social data APIs origin, types, issues. In M. T. Schäfer & K. Van Es (Eds.), The datafied society: Studying culture through data. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Reider, B. (2012). What is in PageRank? A historical and conceptual investigation of a recursive status index. Computational Culture. Retrieved from
  35. Ruppert, E. (2011). Population objects: Interpassive subjects. Sociology, 45(2), 218–233. Scholar
  36. Schütze, H. (1998). Automatic word sense discrimination. Computational Linguistics, 24(1), 97–123.Google Scholar
  37. Striphas, T. (2015). Algorithmic culture. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4–5), 395–412. Scholar
  38. Tkacz, N. (2012). From open source to open government: A critique of open politics the commons and their im/possibilities. Ephemera, 12(4), 386–405. Retrieved from
  39. Tkacz, N. (2015). Connection perfected: What the dashboard reveals. Presented at the digital methods initiative keynote address, Amsterdam. Retrieved from
  40. Uricchio, W. (2017). Data, culture and the ambivalence of algorithms. In M. T. Schäfer & K. Van Es (Eds.), The datafied society: Studying culture through data. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  41. van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 197–208.Google Scholar
  42. Vis, F. (2013). A critical reflection on Big Data: Considering APIs, researchers and tools as data makers. First Monday, 18(10).
  43. Weerkamp, W., & Rijke, M. (2012). Activity prediction: A Twitter-based exploration. Presented at the SIGIR workshop on time-aware information access, Portland. Retrieved from
  44. Xu, J., Lu, T.-C., Compton, R., & Allen, D. (2014). Civil unrest prediction: A Tumblr-based exploration. In W. G. Kennedy, N. Agarwal, & S. J. Yang (Eds.), Social computing, behavioral-cultural modeling and prediction (Vol. 8393, pp. 403–411). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Scholar
  45. Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75–89. Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivo Furman
    • 1
  1. 1.Istanbul Bilgi UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations