This case study examines the co-authoring of unboxing videos by one six-year-old, second-generation Brazilian immigrant child and her mother in the United States. These videos were created in response to boxes filled with gifts they received yearly from relatives in Brazil. To understand this mother-daughter dyad and their video production, this study draws on metaphors of mobility, the logics of reciprocity and obligation in gift-exchange, and the concept of care constellations. The analysis of interviews, field notes, and unboxing videos identified specific routes, rhythms, and frictions that fueled this family digital literacy practice. It also suggested that participants were implicated in a pattern of caregiving through a transnational cycle of gift-exchange. These findings disrupt typical framings of the unboxing genre as a manifestation of U.S. capitalist ethos and foreground the material and discursive production of care in a transnational family’s digital literacy practice.
AarsandPA (2007) Computer and video games in family life: The digital divide as a resource in intergenerational interactions. Childhood14(2): 235–256.
2.
AndersonJAndersonAFriedrichN, et al. (2010) Taking stock of family literacy: Some contemporary perspectives. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy10(1): 33–53.
3.
BerryPWHawisherGESelfeCL (2012) Transnational Literate Lives in Digital Times. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital Press/Utah State University Press. Available at: https://ccdigitalpress.org/transnational
4.
ChaoXMaX (2019) Transnational habitus: Educational, bilingual and biliteracy practices of Chinese sojourner families in the US. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy19(3): 399–423.
5.
CoeC (2011) What is love? The materiality of care in Ghanaian transnational families. International Migration49(6): 7–24.
6.
Compton-LillyCKimJQuastE, et al. (2019) The emergence of transnational awareness among children in immigrant families. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy19(1): 3–33.
7.
CraigDCunninghamS (2017) Toy unboxing: Living in a(n unregulated) material world. Media International Australia163(1): 77–86.
CreswellT (2010) Towards a politics of mobility. Environment and Planning: Society and Space28: 17–31.
10.
CubanS (2014) Transnational families, ICTs and mobile learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education33(6): 737–754.
11.
DavidsonC (2012) Seeking the green basilisk lizard: Acquiring digital literacy practices in the home. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy12(1): 24–45.
12.
DrebyJAdkinsT (2012) The strength of family ties: How US migration shapes children’s ideas of family. Childhood19(2): 169–187.
13.
EricksonF (2006) Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In: Green JL, Camilli G, Elmore PB, et al. (eds) Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 177–191.
14.
FlewittRSHampelRHauckM, et al. (2014) What are multimodal data and transcription?. In: JewittC (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 44–59.
15.
FranciscoV (2015) ‘The internet is magic’: Technology, intimacy and transnational families. Critical Sociology41(1): 173–190.
16.
FuschPIFuschGENessLR (2017) How to conduct a mini-ethnographic case study: A guide for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report22(3): 923–941.
17.
García-SánchezIM (2014) Language and Muslim Immigrant Childhoods: The Politics of Belonging. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
18.
García-SanchezIMOrellanaMF (2019) Introduction: Everyday learning: Centering in schools the language and cultural practices of young people from non-dominant groups. In: García-Sanchez IM and Orellana MF (eds) Language and Cultural Practices in Communities and Schools: Bridging Learning for Students from Non-Dominant Groups. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 1–23.
19.
GhisoMP (2016) The Laundromat as the transnational local: Young children’s literacies of interdependence. Teachers College Record118(1): 1–46.
20.
ItoMGutiérrezKLivingstoneS, et al. (2013) Connected Learning: An Agenda for Research and Design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
21.
KellC (2017) Traveling texts, translocal/transnational literacies, and transcontextual analysis. In: Canagarajah S (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Migration and Language. London: Routledge, pp. 413–430.
22.
KiblerAKPaulickJPalaciosN, et al. (2020) Shared book reading and bilingual decoding in Latinx immigrant homes. Journal of Literacy Research52(2): 180–208.
23.
King‐O’RiainRC (2015) Emotional streaming and transconnectivity: Skype and emotion practices in transnational families in Ireland. Global Networks15(2): 256–273.
24.
LamWSE (2009) Multiliteracies on instant messaging in negotiating local, translocal, and transnational affiliations: A case of an adolescent immigrant. Reading Research Quarterly44(4): 377–397.
25.
LamWSEWarrinerDS (2012) Transnationalism and literacy: Investigating the mobility of people, languages, texts, and practices in contexts of migration. Reading Research Quarterly47(2): 191–215.
26.
Lewis EllisonT (2014) Digital ontologies of self: Two African American adolescents co- construct and negotiate identities through the Sims 2. Digital Culture & Education6(4): 334–357.
27.
Lewis EllisonTKirklandDE (2014) Motherboards, microphones and metaphors: Reexamining new literacies and black feminist thought through technologies of self. E- Learning and Digital Media11(4): 390–405.
28.
Lewis EllisonTWangH (2018) Resisting and redirecting: Agentive practices within an African American parent-child dyad during digital storytelling. Journal of Literacy Research50(1): 52–73.
29.
LewisTY (2013) “We txt 2 sty cnnectd”: An African American mother and son communicate: Digital literacies, meaning-making, and activity theory systems. Journal of Education193(2): 1–13.
30.
LewisTY (2014) Affinity spaces, apprenticeships, and agency: Exploring blogging engagements in family spaces. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy58(1): 71–81.
31.
MarshJ (2015) Unboxing’ videos: Co-construction of the child as cyberflâneur. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education37(3): 369–380.
32.
MarshJHannonPLewisM, et al. (2017) Young children’s initiation into family literacy practices in the digital age. Journal of Early Childhood Research15(1): 47–60.
33.
MaussM (1990) The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. New York, NY: Norton & Company.
34.
McRobertsSBonsignoreEPeytonT, et al. (2016) Do it for the viewers!. Audience engagement behaviors of young YouTubers. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on interaction design and children, New York, NY: ACM, pp. 334–343. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/2930674.2930676
35.
MilesMBHubermanMASaldanaJ (2014) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
36.
MurphySHeadleyM (2020) The role of digital technology in teen mothers’ and their children’s literacy. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy20(4): 755–728.
37.
NicollBNansenB (2018) Mimetic production in YouTube toy unboxing videos. Social Media + Society4(3): 205630511879076–205630511879012.
38.
OliveiraG (2018) Motherhood across Borders: Immigrants and Their Children in Mexico and New York. New York, NY: NYU Press.
39.
OrellanaMF (2009) Translating Childhoods: Immigrant Youth, Language, and Culture. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
40.
OrellanaMFReynoldsJDornerL, et al. (2003) In other words: Translating or “Para phrasing” as a family literacy practice in immigrant households. Reading Research Quarterly38(1): 12–34.
41.
OrellanaMFThorneBCheeA, et al. (2001) Transnational childhoods: The participation of children in processes of family migration. Social Problems48(4): 572–591.
42.
ParreñasRS (2005) Long-distance intimacy: Class, gender and intergenerational relations between mothers and children in Filipino transnational families. Global Networks5(4): 317–336.
43.
ParreñasRS (2014) The intimate labour of transnational communication. Families, Relationships and Societies3(3): 425–442.
44.
SaldañaJ (2009) An introduction to codes and coding. In: SaldañaJ (ed.) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 1–31.
45.
Sefton-GreenJMarshJErstadO, et al. (2016) Establishing a research agenda for the digital literacy practices of young children: A white paper for COST action IS1410. Available at: http://digilitey.eu (accessed 23 June 2021).
46.
ShihKY (2016) Transnational families. In Shehan CL (ed.) The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Family Studies. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1–7.
47.
SkerrettA (2015) Teaching Transnational Youth—Literacy and Education in a Changing World. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
48.
SongK (2016) Nurturing young children’s biliteracy development: A Korean family’s hybrid literacy practices at home. Language Arts93(5): 341–353.
49.
StakeRE (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
50.
StakeRE (2004) Qualitative case study. In: Denzin NK and Lincoln YS (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp. 443–466.
51.
TerrasMMRamsayJ (2016) Family digital literacy practices and children’s mobile phone use. Frontiers in Psychology7: 1957–1911.
52.
VieiraK (2011) Undocumented in a documentary society: Textual borders and transnational religious literacies. Written Communication28(4): 436–461.
53.
VieiraK (2016) Writing remittances: Migration-driven literacy learning in a Brazilian homeland. Research in the Teaching of English50(4): 422–449.
54.
WarrinerDS (2007) Transnational literacies: Immigration, language learning, and identity. Linguistics and Education18(3–4): 201–214.
55.
WildingR (2006) Virtual’ intimacies? Families communicating across transnational contexts. Global Networks6(2): 125–142.
56.
ZelizerVA (2005) The Purchase of Intimacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
