Scams are endemic to digital capitalism, whether they manifest as bitcoin bubbles or bullshit jobs. Drawing on two years of digital ethnography in Myanmar’s Facebook land markets, this article explains what happens when the land scam migrates online. By unraveling warnings of trickery, interviewing wary participants, and inhabiting Facebook Live real estate tours, we argue that the scam is a vocation born of hope and desperation that targets land as the most-stable asset amidst crisis, one which operates through the networked and affective affordances of social media sites. Specifically, we highlight how Facebook enables brokers to ‘crowd’ transactions and amplify hype around sought-after plots, obscuring risk and responsibility while generating excitement and competition. Live video formats enable brokers to cultivate digital intimacy and authenticity from afar, creating a collective emotional investment in what we call the “virtual reality of land.” Bringing together critical geography and media studies, our analysis situates the scam in particular histories of inequality while explaining how these relations are reformulated through social media sites' sensory, affective, and connective affordances.
Alvarez LeonLFRosenJ (under review) ‘Land, reconfigured: Defying the laws of physics, upholding the rules of the market.’
2.
AshtonPWeberRZookM (2017)
The cloud, the crowd, and the city: How new data practices reconfigure urban governance?Big Data & Society4(1): 1–5.
3.
AuslanderP (2012)
Digital liveness: A historico-philosophical perspective. PAJ: A Journal of Performance and Art34(3): 3–11.
4.
BearLBirlaRPuriSS (2015)
Speculation: Futures. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East35(3): 387–391.
5.
BirlaR (2015)
Speculation illicit and complicit: contract, uncertainty, and governmentality. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East35(3): 392–407.
6.
BirlaR (2009) Stages of Capital: Law, Culture, and Market Governance in Late Colonial India.
Durham:
Duke University Press.
7.
BoellstorffT (2015) Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores the Virtually Human.
Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
8.
boydd (2010) Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In: PapacharissiZ (ed.) A Networked Self.
London:
Routledge, pp. 39–58.
9.
BruntonF (2013) Spam: A Shadow History of the Internet.
Boston:
MIT Press.
10.
BurrellJ (2008)
Problematic empowerment: West African internet scams as strategic misrepresentation. Information Technologies and International Development4(4): 15–30.
11.
BurrellJ (2012) Invisible Users: Youth in the Internet Cafes of Urban Ghana.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
12.
CampbellJM (2015) Conjuring Property: Speculation and Environmental Futures in the Brazilian Amazon.
Seattle:
University of Washington Press.
13.
CheesmanN (2015) Opposing the Rule of Law: How Myanmar’s Courts Make Law and Order.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
14.
CockayneDLeszczynskiAZookM (2017)
#HotForBots: Sex, the non-human and digitally mediated spaces of intimate encounter. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space35(6): 1115–1133.
15.
CowanT (2021)
UNCERTAIN GROUNDS : Cartographic negotiation and digitized property on the urban frontier. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research45(3): 442–457.
16.
CowanT (2022) Subaltern Frontiers: Property and Labour in the Neoliberal Indian City.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
17.
DenningM (2010)
Wageless life. New Left Review66: 79–97.
18.
DevLMillerKMLuJ, et al. (2022)
Ambiguous spaces, empirical traces: Accounting for ignorance when researching around the illicit. Progress in Human Geography46(2): 652–671.
GhertnerDA (2015) Rule by Aesthetics: World-Class City Making in Delhi.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
26.
GhertnerDALakeRW (2021) Land fictions and the politics of commodification in city and country. In: GhertnerDALakeRW (eds) Land Fictions: The Commodification of Land in City and Country.
Ithaca:
Cornell University Press, pp. 1–25.
27.
GolanOMartiniM (2019)
Religious live-streaming: constructing the authentic in real time. Information, Communication and Society22(3): 437–454.
28.
GoldmanM (2011)
Speculative urbanism and the making of the next world city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35(3): 555–581.
29.
GraeberD (2018) Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. 1st edn.
New York:
Simon & Schuster.
HullMS (2012) Government of Paper: The Materiality of Bureaucracy in Urban Pakistan.
Berkeley:
University of California Press.
32.
HumphreyC (2020)
Real estate speculation: Volatile social forms at a global frontier of capital. Economy and Society49 (1): 116–140.
33.
Irrawaddy (2022) ‘ ’ [Pyin Oo Lwin land problem requires proper management by the government] The Irrawaddy – Burmese Edition, 10 January 2021. Available at: www.facebook.com/watch/?v=4234145079934612 (accessed 1 January 2023).
34.
King-O’RiainRC (2021)
“They were having so much fun, so genuinely …”: K-pop fan online affect and corroborated authenticity. New Media & Society23(9): 2820–2838.
35.
KlimaA (2019) Ethnography #9.
Durham:
Duke University Press.
36.
LangleyPLeyshonA (2017)
Capitalizing on the crowd: the monetary and financial ecologies of crowdfunding. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(5): 1019–1039.
37.
LewisJS (2020) Scammer’s Yard: The Crime of Black Repair in Jamaica.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
38.
LiTM (2014)
What is land? Assembling a resource for global investment. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers39(4): 589–602.
39.
LundCL (2023)
An air of legality – Legalization under conditions of rightlessness in Indonesia. The Journal of Peasant Studies50(4): 1295–1316.
40.
MarkS (2016)
Are the odds of justice “stacked” against them? Challenges and opportunities for securing land claims by smallholder farmers in Myanmar. Critical Asian Studies48(3): 443–460.
41.
MarxK (1973) Grundrisse: Outlines of the Critique of Political Economy [1857–1858].
London:
Penguin.
42.
McLeanJ (2020) Changing Digital Geographies.
Berlin:
Springer International Publishing.
43.
McNealyJE (2022)
Platforms as phish farms: Deceptive social engineering at scale. New Media & Society24(7): 1677–1694.
44.
MihmS (2009) A Nation of Counterfeiters: Capitalists, Con Men, and the Making of the United States.
Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
45.
NamS (2020)
Fiction, fraud, and formality: the legal infrastructure of property speculation in Cambodia. Critical Asian Studies52(3): 364–377.
46.
NgaiS (2020) Theory of the Gimmick: Aesthetic Judgment and Capitalist Form.
Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
47.
PolanyiK (2001) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time.
Boston:
Beacon Press.
48.
PosterWR (2022)
Introduction to special issue on scams, fakes, and frauds. New Media & Society24(7): 1535–1547.
49.
PowersD (2012)
Notes on hype. International Journal of Communications6: 857–873.
50.
RavalNDourish P (2016) Standing out from the crowd: Emotional labor, body labor, and temporal labor in ridesharing. CSCW 16. ACM: 97–107. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2820026
ReadeJ (2021)
Keeping it raw on the ‘gram: Authenticity, relatability and digital intimacy in fitness cultures on Instagram. New Media & Society23(3): 535–553.
53.
RobertsJLRhoadsEL (2021)
Myanmar’s hidden-in-plain-sight social infrastructure: Nalehmu through multiple ruptures. Critical Asian Studies (4): 1–21.
54.
ScannellP (2001)
Authenticity and experience. Discourse Studies3(4): 405–411.
SchoenbergerLBebanA (2020)
Rupturing violent land imaginaries: Finding hope through a land titling campaign in Cambodia. Agriculture and Human Values38: 301–312.
57.
SippelSR (2021) Historical grounding, political contexts, material hurdles: Towards more in‐depth understandings of “finance going farming”. Journal of Agrarian Change [Preprint]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12451.
58.
SippelSRVisserO (2021)
Introduction to the symposium ‘Reimagining land: Materiality, affect and the uneven trajectories of land transformation’. Agriculture and Human Values38: 271–282.
59.
SwartzL (2022)
Theorizing the 2017 blockchain ICO bubble as a network scam. New Media & Society24(7): 1695–1713.
60.
ThawnghmungAM (2019) Everyday Economic Survival in Myanmar.
Madison:
University of Wisconsin Press.
61.
UpadhyaC (2020)
Assembling Amaravati: Speculative accumulation in a new Indian city. Economy and Society49(1): 141–169.
62.
VerderyK (1998) Fuzzy property: Rights, power, and identity in Transylvania’s decollectivization. In: NelsonJMCharlesTLeeW (eds) Transforming Post-Communist Political Economies.
Ottawa:
National Research Council.
63.
VerderyK (2004) The obligations of ownership: Restoring rights to land in postsocialist Transylvania. In: VerderyKHumphreyC (eds) Property in Question: Value Transformation in the Global Economy.
Oxford:
Berg, pp. 139–159.
64.
WittekindCT (2022) ‘Time to change’: Speculating on ‘transition’ in Myanmar’s New Yangon City. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Harvard University.
65.
WoodsK (2011)
Ceasefire capitalism military–private partnerships, resource concessions and military–state building in the Burma. Journal of Peasant Studies38(4): 747–770.
66.
WoodsKM (2019)
Green territoriality: Conservation as state territorialization in a resource frontier. Human Ecology47: 217–232.
67.
YtrebergE (2009)
Extended liveness and eventfulness in multi-platform reality formats. New Media & Society11(4): 467–485.
68.
ZharkevichI (2021)
“We are in the process”: The exploitation of hope and the political economy of waiting among the aspiring irregular migrants in Nepal. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space39(5): 827–843.
69.
ZookM (2007)
‘Your urgent assistance is requested: The intersection of 419 Spam and New Networks of Imagination. Ethics, Place & Environment10(1): 65–88.
’ 
[Real Estate Association urges people to beware of being cheated in buying real estate through the use of technology to create fake grants and slips.] 
’ [Pyin Oo Lwin land problem requires proper management by the government]