Algorithmic rankings like streaming charts automatically convert users’ behavioral traces into orders of content, shaping their public visibility and motivating fans’ data work to promote favored cultural products on rankings. Building on social acceleration and the sociology of quantification, we take a media sociology perspective to examine how algorithmic automation accelerates public visibility and fans’ data work. Based on netnography of a Chinese idol group INTO1’s fans, we theorize that algorithms, a technological acceleration in audience data production, trigger two changes in public visibility encountered by fans: ephemeral visibility and externally visible production. They further accelerate the pace of fans’ data work, reflected in generating more data in less time, speeding up reaction, organizing data work by time intervals, and adding additional and indirect data work. While prior algorithm studies emphasize opacity, we highlight the important yet underexplored speed aspect of algorithms and its social impact on the time dimension.
AlaviSAhujaVMeduryY (2010) Building participation, reciprocity and trust: netnography of an online community of APPLE using regression analysis for prediction. Apeejay Business Review11(1 & 2): 82–96.
2.
AnandNPetersonRA (2000) When market information constitutes fields: sensemaking of markets in the commercial music industry. Organization Science11(3): 270–284.
3.
BeerD (2017) The data analytics industry and the promises of real-time knowing: perpetuating and deploying a rationality of speed. Journal of Cultural Economy10(1): 21–33.
4.
BeerD (2018) Envisioning the power of data analytics. Information, Communication & Society21(3): 465–479.
BergenerJSantariusT (2021) A pace of life indicator. Development and validation of a General Acceleration Scale. Time & Society30(3): 273–301.
7.
BishopS (2019) Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society21(11–12): 2589–2606.
8.
BoniniTGandiniA (2019) “First week is editorial, second week is algorithmic”: platform gatekeepers and the platformization of music curation. Social Media + Society5(4): 2056305119880006.
9.
BroughMMShresthovaS (2011) Fandom meets activism: rethinking civic and political participation. Transformative Works and Cultures10.
10.
BucherT (2012) Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society14(7): 1164–1180.
11.
ChoiSJ (2023) Chart manipulation and fan labor in the online moral economy of K-pop. In: Introducing Korean Popular Culture. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 44–52.
12.
ChristinALewisR (2021) The drama of metrics: status, spectacle, and resistance among YouTube drama creators. Social Media + Society7(1): 2056305121999660.
CotterK (2019) Playing the visibility game: how digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram. New Media & Society21(4): 895–913.
15.
CreechB (2020) Exploring the politics of visibility: technology, digital representation, and the mediated workings of power. Semiotica2020(236–237): 123–139.
16.
CuiDWuF (2024) Toward an operationality perspective on fandom: exploring Chinese fans’ emerging practices in platform-mediated environments. New Media & Society27: 5180–5200.
17.
De KosnikA (2012) Fandom as free labor. In: ScholzT (ed.) Digital Labor: The Internet as Playground and Factory. Abingdon: Routledge.
18.
DrottE (2020) Fake streams, listening bots, and click farms: Counterfeiting attention in the streaming music economy. American Music38(2): 153–175.
19.
DuguayS (2018) Social media’s breaking news: the logic of automation in Facebook trending topics and Twitter moments. Media International Australia166(1): 20–33.
20.
EarlJKimportK (2009) Movement societies and digital protest: fan activism and other nonpolitical protest online. Sociological Theory27(3): 220–243.
21.
EspelandW (2016) Reverse engineering and emotional attachments as mechanisms mediating the effects of quantification. Historical Social Research41(2 (156)): 280–304.
22.
EspelandWNSauderM (2007) Rankings and reactivity: how public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology113(1): 1–40.
23.
EspelandWNStevensML (1998) Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology24(1): 313–343.
24.
EspelandWNStevensML (2008) A sociology of quantification. European Journal of Sociology49(3): 401–436.
25.
Ferrer-ConillRSjøvaagHOlsenRKr (2023) Datafied societies: digital infrastructures, data power, and regulations. Media and Communication11(2): 291–295.
26.
FourcadeMKluttzDN (2020) A Maussian bargain: accumulation by gift in the digital economy. Big Data & Society7(1): 205395171989709.
27.
GlaserBG (1998) Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
28.
GlaserBGStraussAL (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
29.
Guerrero-PicoM (2017) #Fringe, audiences, and fan labor: Twitter activism to save a TV show from cancellation. International Journal of Communication11: 3934–3954.
30.
HansenHK (2015) Numerical operations, transparency illusions and the datafication of governance. European Journal of Social Theory18(2): 203–220.
31.
HeQLiY (2023) Civic engagement intention and the data-driven fan community: investigating the motivation behind Chinese fans’ online data-making behavior from a collective action perspective. Social Media + Society9(1): 20563051221150409.
32.
HillsM (2018) Netflix, transfandom and ‘trans TV’: where data-driven fandom meets fan reflexivity. Critical Studies in Television: The International Journal of Television Studies13(4): 495–498.
33.
HollsteinBRosaH (2023) Social acceleration: a challenge for companies? Insights for business ethics from resonance theory. Journal of Business Ethics188(4): 709–723.
34.
JenkinsH (1992) Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. Abingdon: Routledge.
35.
JianMLiuC (2009) “Democratic entertainment” commodity and unpaid labor of reality TV: a preliminary analysis of China’s Supergirl. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies10(4): 524–543.
36.
KozinetsRV (1999) On netnography: initial reflections on consumer research investigations of cyberculture. Advances in Consumer Research25(1): 366–371.
37.
KozinetsRV (2002) The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research39(1): 61–72.
LiuAYJiATanejaH, et al. (2025) Stakeholder-desired audiences: fans’ audience data imaginaries and how they shape industry data practices. Convergence. Epub ahead of print 20 August. DOI: 10.1177/13548565251366412.
41.
LowrieI (2018) Algorithms and automation: an introduction. Cultural Anthropology33(3): 349–359.
42.
MaXGongXCongX, et al. (2021) Weibo “super topic community”: virtual community from the perspective of interactive ceremony chain. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on social science and higher education, 23 November, pp. 63–67. Atlantis Press. Available at: https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/icsshe-21/125964105 (accessed 22 June 2025).
43.
MauS (2019) The Metric Society: On the Quantification of the Social. Cambridge: Polity Press.
44.
MillerPV (1994) Made-to-order and standardized audiences: forms of reality in audience measurement. In: EttemaJSWhitneyDC (eds) Audience Making: How the Media Create the Audience. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45.
MorseJM (1995) The significance of saturation. Qualitative Health Research5(2): 147–149.
46.
NapoliPM (2011) Audience Evolution: New Technologies and the Transformation of Media Audiences. New York: Columbia University Press.
47.
PellegrinoG (2019) Inside “the below”: ambivalences of datafication and infrastructuring of everyday life. Tecnoscienza10(1): 89–113.
48.
PorterTM (1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
RiederBMatamoros-FernándezACorominaÒ (2018) From ranking algorithms to ‘ranking cultures’: investigating the modulation of visibility in YouTube search results. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies24(1): 50–68.
50.
RosaH (2003) Social acceleration: ethical and political consequences of a desynchronized high–speed society. Constellations: An International Journal of Critical & Democratic Theory10(1): 3–33.
51.
RosaH (2013) Social Acceleration: A New Theory of Modernity. New York: Columbia University Press.
52.
ShoreySHowardP (2016) Automation, big data and politics: a research review. International Journal of Communication10.
UlfertsHKorunkaCKubicekB (2013) Acceleration in working life: an empirical test of a sociological framework. Time & Society22(2): 161–185.
59.
WrightL (2022) Automated platform governance through visibility and scale: on the transformational power of AutoModerator. Social Media + Society8(1): 20563051221077020.
60.
WuX (2021) Fan leaders’ control on Xiao Zhan’s Chinese fan community. Transformative Works and Cultures36.
61.
YinY (2020) An emergent algorithmic culture: the data-ization of online fandom in China. International Journal of Cultural Studies23(4): 475–492.
62.
ZhangQNegusK (2020) East Asian pop music idol production and the emergence of data fandom in China. International Journal of Cultural Studies23(4): 493–511.
63.
ZhangYHuangSLiT (2023) “Push-and-pull” for visibility: how do fans as users negotiate over algorithms with Chinese digital platforms?Information, Communication & Society26(2): 321–339.
64.
ZhaoEJ (2021) Reconfiguring audience measurement in platform ecologies of video streaming: iQiyi’s pivot toward data-driven fandom and algorithmic metrics. International Journal of Communication15.
