Article published In: Skype and domestic settings: Interpersonal video communication as a site of human sociality
Edited by Richard Harper, Rod Watson and Christian Licoppe
[Pragmatics 27:3] 2017
► pp. 447–474
The Skype paradox
Homelessness and selective intimacy in the use of communications technology
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 16 October 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.27.3.06har
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.27.3.06har
Abstract
Digital technologies are likely to be appropriated by the homeless just as they are by other segments of society. However, these appropriations will reflect the particularities of their circumstances. What are these appropriations? Are they beneficial or effective? Can Skype, as a case in point, assuage the social disconnection that must be, for many, the experience of being homeless? This paper analyses some evidence about these questions and, in particular, the ways communications media are selected, oriented to and accounted for by the homeless young. Using data from a small corpus of interviews, it examines the specific ways in which choice of communication (face-to-face, social media, or video, etc.), are described by these individuals as elected for tactical and strategic reasons having to do with managing their family relations. These relations are massively important both in terms of how communications media are deployed, and in terms of being one of the sources of the homeless state the young find themselves in. The paper examines some of the methodical ways these issues are articulated and the type of ‘causal facticity’ thereby constituted in interview talk. The paper also remarks on the paradoxical problem that technologies like Skype provide: at once allowing people in the general to communicate but in ways that the homeless young want to resist in the particular. The consequences of this for the shaping of communications technology in the future are remarked upon.
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 251: 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 20101, pp. 1291–1300.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Roth, Philip & Christina Laut-Berger
Abel, Susan, Tanya Machin & Charlotte Brownlow
Ferreira, Dina Maria Martins & Jony Kellson de Castro Silva
2021.
The adaptability of becoming. In The Pragmatics of Adaptability [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 319], ► pp. 171 ff.
Davis-Owusu, Kadian, Evans Owusu, Lucio Marcenaro, Carlo Regazzoni, Loe Feijs & Jun Hu
Harper, Richard, Sean Rintel, Rod Watson & Kenton O’Hara
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 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.
