In this essay, I try to embody the fragmented nature of our digital culture and lives. Through autoethnographic writing and personal vignettes, I narrate and theorize five interrelated themes: interactivity, the co-construction of digital stories, blurring the idea of time and space, the concept of transnational cyber bodies, and finally, the notion of a transnational and queer cyber home. Hence, my goal is to present personal stories that embody forms of cyber or digital autoethnography.
AtayA. (2015). Globalization’s impact on cultural identity formation: Queer diasporic males on cyberspace. Lexington Books.
2.
AtayA. (2018). Digital life writing: The failure of a diasporic, queer, blue Tinker Bell. Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 2(1), 183–193.
3.
AtayA. (2019). Examination of transnational geolocation-based online dating and hook up application. InAtayA.D’SilvaM. (Eds.), Mediated intercultural communication in a digital age. Routledge.
4.
boydd. (2014). It is complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.
5.
DasguptaR. K. (2017). Digital queer cultures in India: Politics, intimacies, and belonging. Routledge.
6.
EakinJ. P. (2008). Living autobiographically: How we create identity in narrative. Cornell University Press.
7.
FisherW. (1989). Human communication as narration: Towards philosophy of reason, value and action. University of South Carolina Press.
8.
GajjalaR. (2002). An interrupted postcolonial/feminist cyberethnography: Complicity and resistance in the “cyberfield.”. Feminist Media Studies, 2(2), 177–193.doi:10.1080/14680770220150854
9.
GajjalaR. (2004). Negotiating cyberspace/negotiating RI. InGonzalesA.HoustonM.ChenV. (Eds.), Our voices: Essays in culture, ethnicity, and communication (pp.82–91). Roxbury.
10.
GajjalaR. (2006). Cyberethnography: Reading South Asian digital diaspora. InLandzeliusK. (Ed.), Native on the net: Indigenous and diasporic peoples in the virtual age (pp.272–291). Routledge.
11.
GudelunasD. (2012). There’s an app for that: The uses and gratifications of online social network for gay men. Sexuality & Culture, 16(4), 347–365.doi:10.1007/s12119-012-9127-4
12.
JenkinsH. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York University Press.
OngJ. C. (2017). Queer cosmopolitanism in the disaster zone: ‘My Grindr became the United Nations’. International Communication Gazette, 79(6-7), 656–673.doi:10.1177/1748048517727177
15.
PalfreyJ.GasserU. (2013). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. InHaugeD.MusserS. (Eds.), The millennial generation (pp.35–42). Greenhaven Press.
16.
ParmentA. (2012). Generation Y in consumer and labor markets. Routledge.
17.
PayneR. (2015). The promiscuity of network culture: Queer theory and digital media. Routledge.
18.
SchwalbeC. B. (2009). Leveraging the digital media habits of the millennials: Strategies for teaching journalism courses. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, Fall, 25(1), 53–68.
19.
TanyelF.StuartE. W.GriffinJ. (2013). Have ‘Millenials’ embraced digital advertising as they have embraced digital media?Journal of Promotion Management, 19(5), 652–673.doi:10.1080/10496491.2013.829161
