In:Skyping the Family: Interpersonal video communication and domestic life
Edited by Richard Harper, Rod Watson and Christian Licoppe
[Benjamins Current Topics 103] 2019
► pp. 147–174
Get fulltext
The Skype paradox
Homelessness and selective intimacy in the use of communications technology
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 13 August 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.103.06har
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.103.06har
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Methods and approach
- 1.2The relation between this approach and other ways of addressing homelessness
- 1.3Some remarks on data
- 2.Analysis
- 2.1Preliminary observations
- 2.2The homeless and family communication
- 2.3Identity, communication, participation frameworks
- 2.4The ‘politics of living’ in the detailed organisation of communications
- 3.Conclusion: Reasons, causes, evidentiality
Notes References
References (41)
Anderson, N. 1923. The Hobo: The Sociology of the Homeless Man. Chicago: Chicago Council of Social Agencies.
Aronsson, K., and A. Cekaite. 2011. “Activity Contracts and Directives in Everyday Family Politics.” Discourse and Society 22 (2): 137–54.
Bourgois, P. 1998a. “Just Another Night in a Shooting Gallery.” Theory, Culture and Society 15 (2): 37–66.
1998b. “The Moral Economies of Homeless Heroin Addicts: Confronting Ethnography, H.I.V. Risk and Everyday Violence in San Francisco Shooting Encampments.” Substance Use and Misuse 33 (11): 2323–51.
Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Networked Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol. I. Cambridge, MA; Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
1997. The Power of Identity, The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol. II. Cambridge, MA/Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
1998. End of Millennium, The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol. III. Cambridge, MA/Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Duranti, A., and C. Goodwin. 1992. “Editors’ Introduction”, Rethinking Context, ed. by A. Duranti, and C. Goodwin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garfinkel, H., G. Girton, E. Livingston, and H. Sacks. No date. Studies of Kids’ Culture and Kids’ Talk. Manuscript.
Garfinkel, H., and H. Sacks. 1970. “On Formal Structures of Practical Actions.” In Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments, ed. by J. C. McKinney, and E. A. Tiryakian, 337–366. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts.
Goodwin, C. 1981. Conversational Organization: Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.
Harper, R. 2011. Texture: Human Expression in the Age of Communication Overload. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Horst, H. A., and D. Miller. 2006. The Cell Phone: An Anthropology of Communication. Oxford/New York: Berg.
Jackson, E. 2012. “Fixed in Mobility-Young Homeless People and the City.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 36 (4): 725–41.
Katz, J., and M. Aakhus. 2002. Perpetual Contact: Mobile communication, Private Talk, Public Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Latour, B. 2013. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence. (Trans C. Porter). Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Rose, E. 1960. “The English Record of a Natural Sociology.” American Sociological Review 25: 193–208.
Sacks, H. 1972a. “On the Usability of Conversational Data for Doing Sociology.” In Studies in Social Interaction, ed. by D. Sudnow. New York: The Free Press.
1972b. “On the Analyzability of Stories by Children.” In Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, ed. by John J. Gumperz, and Dell Hymes. New York: Holt, Rinehart.
1987. “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by G. R. Button, and J. R. E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, H., E. Schegloff, and G. Jefferson. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50 (4): 696–735.
Sacks, H., and E. Schegloff. 1979. “Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and Their Interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by G. Psathas, 15–21. New York: Irvington Press.
1972. “Notes on a Conversational Practice: Formulating Place.” In Studies in social interaction, ed. by D. Sudnow, 75–119. New York: Free Press.
1995. “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement III: The Omni-relevance of Action.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 28 (3): 185–213.
Speier, M. 1971. “The Everyday World of the Child.” In Understanding everyday life, ed. by J. Douglas, 188–217. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Spradley, J. P. 1970. You Owe Yourself a Drunk: An Ethnography of Urban Nomads. Boston: Little, Brown.
Watson, R. 2015. “De-Reifying Categories.” In Advances in membership categorization analysis, ed. by R. Fitzgerald, and W. Housely, 23–49. Los Angeles: Sage.
Woelfer, J., and D. Hendry. 2010. “Homeless Young People’s Experiences with Information Systems: Life and Work in a Community Technology Center.” Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2010, pp. 1291–1300.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Harper, Richard, Sean Rintel, Rod Watson & Kenton O’Hara
2022. The ‘interrogative gaze’. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 319 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
