Daigou, literally translated as buying on behalf of, is a Mandarin term that refers to a form of personalised transnational trading activity, which is generally characterised by practices of purchasing locally manufactured products overseas and reselling them to consumers in China via international courier services. This article examines Chinese international students’ digital labour invested in daigou and their use of social media, particularly WeChat, in running their personal enterprises. Through the analytical lens of ‘boundary’, the article reveals how daigou activities involve sustained crossing and reconstructing boundaries of privacy through selective self-disclosure of personal information. This study contributes to the empirical literature on international students’ everyday use of digital media by highlighting their work practices in the digital age. Conceptually, the case study of daigou suggests overlapping spaces between various forms of digital labour and the relevance of ‘unproductive’ labour which constitutes a necessary dimension of online work.
AbidinC (2015) Communicative ❤ intimacies: influencers and perceived interconnectedness. Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology8: 1–16.
2.
AbidinC (2016) ‘Aren’t these just young, rich women doing vain things online?’ Influencer selfies as subversive frivolity. Social Media and Society2(2): 1–17.
3.
BaasM (2010) Imagined Mobility: Migration and Transnationalism among Indian Students in Australia. London: Anthem Press.
4.
BaymNK (2015) Connect with your audience! The relational labor of connection. Communication Review18(1): 14–22.
5.
BergJ (2016) Income security in the on-demand economy: findings and policy lessons from a survey of crowdworkers. Conditions of work and employment series no.74. Geneva: International Labour Organisation.
6.
boydd (2011) Social network sites as networked publics: affordances, dynamics, and implications. In: PapacharissZ (ed.) A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge, pp. 39–58.
7.
boyddHeerJ (2006) Profiles as conversation: networked identity performance on friendster. In: Proceedings of 39th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Kauai, HI, 4–7 January. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.
8.
BucherTHelmondA (2018) The affordances of social media platforms. In: BurgessJMarwickAPoellT (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media. London: SAGE, pp. 233–253.
9.
BurrellJ (2009) The field site as a network: a strategy for locating ethnographic research. Field Methods21(2): 181–199.
10.
CasilliAA (2017) Digital labor studies go global: toward a digital decolonial turn. International Journal of Communication11: 3934–3954.
11.
ChenYRossH (2015) ‘Creating a home away from home’: Chinese undergraduate student enclaves in US higher education. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs44(3): 155–181.
12.
CirucciAM (2018) A new women’s work: digital interactions, gender, and social network sites. International Journal of Communication12(23): 2948–2970.
13.
CunninghamSCraigD (2017) Being ‘really real’ on YouTube: authenticity, community and brand culture in social media entertainment. Media International Australia164(1): 71–81.
14.
DavisJLJurgensonN (2014) Context collapse: theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society17(4): 476–485.
15.
D’CruzPNoronhaE (2016) Positives outweighing negatives: the experiences of Indian crowdsourced workers. Work Organisation, Labour and Globalisation10(1): 44–63.
16.
DiminescuD (2008) The connected migrant: an epistemological manifesto. Social Science Information47(4): 565–579.
17.
DuffyBESchwartzB (2018) Digital ‘women’s work?’ Job recruitment ads and the feminization of social media employment. New Media & Society20(8): 2972–2989.
18.
EllisonNHeinoRGibbsJ (2006) Managing impressions Online: self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11(2): 415–441.
19.
EllisonNBVitakJ (2015) Social network site affordances and their relationship to social capital processes. In: SundarS (ed.) The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology. Boston, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 205–227.
20.
FuchsC (2014) Digital Labour and Karl Marx. New York: Routledge.
21.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.
22.
GomesCBerryMAlzougoolB, et al. (2014) Home away from home: international students and their identity-based social networks in Australia. Journal of International Students4(1): 2–15.
23.
GrahamMHjorthILehdonvirtaV (2017) Digital labour and development: impacts of global digital labour platforms and the gig economy on worker livelihoods. Transfer23(2): 135–162.
24.
GranovetterMS (1973) The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology78(6): 1360–1380.
25.
HardtMNegriA (2000) Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
HineC (2015) Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied and Everyday. London: Bloomsbury.
27.
HintonSHjorthL (2013) Understanding Social Media. London: SAGE.
28.
KimKHYunHYoonY (2009) The internet as a facilitator of cultural hybridization and interpersonal relationship management for Asian international students in South Korea. Asian Journal of Communication19(2): 152–169.
LazzaratoM (1996) Immaterial labor. In: VirnoPHardtM (eds) Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 133–148.
31.
LehdonvirtaV (2016) Algorithms that divide and unite: delocalization, identity, and collective action in ‘microwork’. In: FleckerJ (ed.) Space, Place and Global Digital Work. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 53–80.
32.
LimSSPhamB (2016) ‘If you are a foreigner in a foreign country, you stick together’: technologically mediated communication and acculturation of migrant students. New Media & Society18(10): 2171–2188.
33.
MadianouM (2017) ‘Doing family’ at a distance: transnational family practices in polymedia environments. In: HjorthLHorstHGallowayA, et al. (eds) The Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography. New York: Routledge, pp. 102–111.
34.
MarginsonS (2014) Student self-formation in international education. Journal of Studies in International Education18(1): 6–22.
35.
MarginsonSNylandCSawirE, et al. (2010) International Student Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
MartinF (2017) Rethinking network capital: hospitality work and parallel trading among Chinese students in Melbourne. Mobilities12(6): 890–907.
37.
MarwickAEboydd (2011) I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society13(1): 114–133.
38.
MarwickAEboydd (2014) Networked privacy: how teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society16(7): 1051–1067.
39.
MillerDSlaterD (2000) The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach. Oxford: Berg.
40.
Nippert-EngCE (1996) Home and Work: Negotiating Boundaries through Everyday Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
41.
NylandCForbes-MewettHMarginsonS, et al. (2009) International student-workers in Australia: a new vulnerable workforce. Journal of Education and Work22(1): 1–14.
PengY (2017) Affective networks: how WeChat enhances Tencent’s digital business governance. Chinese Journal of Communication10(3): 264–278.
44.
PostigoH (2016) The socio-technical architecture of digital labor: converting play into YouTube money. New Media & Society18(2): 332–349.
45.
QuinnKPapacharissiZ (2018) Personal connection and relational maintenance in social media use. In: BurgessJMarwickAPoellT (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media. London: SAGE, pp. 353–371.
46.
RobertsonS (2013) Transnational Student-Migrants and the State: The Education-Migration Nexus. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
47.
SawGAbbottWDonagheyJ, et al. (2013) Social media for international students – it’s not all about Facebook. Library Management34(3): 156–174.
48.
ScholzT (2012) Introduction: why does digital labor matter now? In: ScholzT (ed.) Digital Labor: The Internet as Playground and Factory. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–10.
49.
SenftTM (2008) Camgirls: Celebrity and Community in the Age of Social Networks. New York: Peter Lang.
50.
SilverD (2000) Looking backwards, looking forward: cyberculture studies 1990-2000. In: GauntlettD (ed.) Web.studies: Rewiring Media Studies for the Digital Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 19–30.
51.
SinSCJKimKS (2013) International students’ everyday life information seeking: the informational value of social networking sites. Library and Information Science Research35(2): 107–116.
52.
SunP (2019) Your order, their labor: an exploration of algorithms and laboring on food delivery platforms in China. Chinese Journal of Communication12(3): 308–323.
TerranovaT (2004) Network Culture: Politics for the Information Age. Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press.
55.
WellmanB (2001) Physical place and cyberplace: the rise of personalized networking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research25(2): 227–252.
ZhangGWangWY (2019) ‘Property talk’ among Chinese Australians: WeChat and the production of diasporic space. Media International Australia173(1): 53–65.
58.
ZhangL (2017) Fashioning the feminine self in ‘prosumer capitalism’: women’s work and the transnational reselling of Western luxury online. Journal of Consumer Culture17(2): 184–204.
