This paper investigates young people living in a regional Australian town and explores the ways that they negotiate place-making using mobile media. Australia has been characterised as a country of vast distances, and young people living in rural and regional areas are at the centre of narratives that position digital technologies as enablers or disruptors. This paper puts such deterministic discourses aside to focus on the ways place is made by young people living outside the city according to their own perspectives and experiences. Focus groups with 62 participants aged 16–28 years pointed to many of those in-the-background place-making practices and signalled the near seamless way that making places was simultaneously done online as well as in material, face-to-face contexts. The forms of place made by the young people of this study comprised a range of elasticised neighbourhoods and public spaces that were materially anchored, though extended digitally through territorially embedded socialities and shared locational information. Regional geographies retained their meaning, though traditional constraints could be renegotiated to reflect youthful relationships with local place.
AbeeleV. M. M. (2016). Mobile youth culture: A conceptual development. Mobile Media & Communication, 4(1), 85–101.
2.
AitkenS. C. (2001). Geographies of young people: The morally contested spaces of identity. London, UK: Routledge.
3.
AlstonM. (2004). “You don’t want to be a check-out chick all your life”: The out-migration of young people from Australia’s small rural towns. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 39(3), 299–313.
4.
AminA.ThriftN. (2002). Cities: Reimagining the urban. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
BlaineyG. (2001). The tyranny of distance: How distance shaped Australia’s history. Sydney, Australia: Macmillan.
10.
Bork-HüfferT. (2016). Mediated sense of place: Effects of mediation and mobility on the place perception of German professionals in Singapore. New Media & Society, 18(10), 2155–2170.
11.
boydd. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12.
CampbellS. W. (2018). From frontier to field: Old and new theoretical directions in mobile communication studies. Communication Theory, 29(1), 46–65.
13.
CieslikM.SimpsonD. (2013). Key concepts in youth studies. London, UK: SAGE.
14.
CresswellT. (2015). Place: An introduction. Oxford, UK: John Wiley.
15.
CumiskeyK. M.HjorthF. (2017). Haunting hands: Mobile media practices and loss. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
16.
De Souza e SilvaA. (2013). Location-aware mobile technologies: Historical, social and spatial approaches. Mobile Media & Communication, 1(1), 116–121.
17.
DuffyM. (2013). The requirement of having a body. Geographical Research, 51(2), 130–136.
18.
Ei ChewH.LaRoseR.SteinfieldC.VelasquezA. (2011). The use of online social networking by rural youth and its effects on community attachment. Information, Communication & Society, 14(5), 726–747.
19.
EkR. (2006). Media studies, geographical imaginations and relational space. In FalkheimerJ.JanssonA. (Eds.), Geographies of communication: The spatial turn in media studies (pp. 45–66). Goteborg, Sweden: Nordicom.
20.
EspinozaG.JuvonenJ. (2011). The pervasiveness, connectedness, and intrusiveness of social network site use among young adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(12), 705–709.
21.
FreestoneR.LiuE. (2016). Place and placelessness revisited. New York, NY: Routledge.
22.
FrithJ. (2015). Smartphones as locative media. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
23.
FroshP. (2015). The gestural image: The selfie, photography theory, and kinesthetic sociability. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1607–1628.
24.
FurlongA.CartmelF. (2007). Young people and social change: New perspectives. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
25.
GordonE.de Souza e SilvaA. (2011). Net locality: Why location matters in a networked world. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
26.
GreenE. (2007). Outwardly mobile: Young people and mobile technologies. In KatzJ. E. (Ed.), Machines that become us: The social context of personal communication technology (pp. 201–218). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
27.
HeleyJ.JonesL. (2012). Relational rurals: Some thoughts on relating things and theory in rural studies. Journal of Rural Studies, 28, 208–217.
28.
HessA. (2015). The selfie assemblage. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1629–1646.
29.
HjorthL. (2013). Relocating the mobile: A case study of locative media in Seoul, South Korea. Convergence, 19(2), 237–249.
30.
HjorthL. (2017). Domesticating cartographies: Gendered mobile media in the region. In FarmanJ. (Ed.), Foundations of mobile media studies: Essential texts on the formation of a field (pp. 138–149). London, UK: Routledge.
31.
HjorthL.ArnoldM. (2013). Online@AsiaPacific: Mobile, social and locative media in the Asia-Pacific. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
32.
HjorthL.PinkS. (2014). New visualities and the digital wayfarer: Reconceptualising camera phone photography and locative media. Mobile Media & Communication, 2(1), 40–57.
33.
HjorthL.RichardsonI. (2017). Pokémon GO: Mobile media play, place-making, and the digital wayfarer. Mobile Media & Communication, 5(1), 3–14.
34.
JansenD.CuthillM.HafnerD. (2012). Defining identity in the face of rapid urban growth: Changing times in a regional Australian city. Urban Policy and Research, 30(2), 161–174.
35.
KnightS. (2015). Delivering the digital region: Leveraging digital connectivity to deliver regional digital growth. Australian Planner, 52(1), 4–15.
36.
KraackA.KenwayJ. (2002). Place, time and stigmatised youthful identities: Bad boys in paradise. Journal of Rural Studies, 18, 145–155.
37.
KrautR.KieslerS.BonevaB.CummingsJ.HelgesonV.CrawfordA. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49–75.
38.
KullmannK. (2013). Design for decline: Landscape architecture strategies for the Western Australian Wheatbelt. Landscape Journal, 32(2), 243–260.
39.
LankesterA.HughesH.FothM. (2018). Mapping a connected learning ecology to foster digital participation in regional communities. In DezuanniM.FothM.MallanK.HughesH. (Eds.), Digital participation through social living labs: Valuing local knowledge, enhancing engagement (pp. 141–171). Cambridge, MA: Chandos.
40.
LeeD. (2010). Digital cameras, personal photography and the reconfiguration of spatial experiences. The Information Society, 26, 266–275.
41.
LeszczynskiA. (2015). Spatial media/tion. Progress in Human Geography, 39(6), 729–751.
42.
LiaoT.HumphreysL. (2015). Layar-ed places: Using mobile augmented reality to tactically reengage, reproduce, and reappropriate public space. New Media & Society, 17(9), 1418–1435.
43.
LicoppeC. (2013). Merging mobile communication studies and urban research: Mobile locative media, “onscreen encounters” and the reshaping of the interaction order in public places. Mobile Media & Communication, 1(1), 122–128.
44.
LingR. (2004). The mobile connection: The cell phone’s impact on society. San Francisco, CA: Elsevier.
45.
LingR. (2012). Taken for grantedness: The embedding of mobile communication into society. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
46.
LundgrenA. S.JohanssonA. (2017). Digital rurality: Producing the countryside in online struggles for rural survival. Journal of Rural Studies, 51, 73–82.
47.
MadianouM.MillerD. (2012). Migration and new media: Transnational families and polymedia. London, UK: Routledge.
48.
MadrizE. (2000). Focus groups in feminist research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 835–850). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
49.
MartinF.RizviF. (2014). Making Melbourne: Digital connectivity and international students’ experience of locality. Media, Culture & Society, 36(7), 1016–1031.
50.
MasseyD. (2005). For space. London, UK: SAGE.
51.
MihailidisP. (2014). A tethered generation: Exploring the role of mobile phones in the daily life of young people. Mobile Media & Communication, 2(1), 58–72.
52.
MooresS. (2012). Media, place and mobility. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
53.
MooresS. (2014). Digital orientations: “Ways of the hand” and practical knowing in media uses and other manual activities. Mobile Media & Communication, 2(2), 196–208.
National Institute of Economic and Industry Research. (2016). City of Greater Shepparton: Employment by industry (total). Retrieved from http://economy.id.com.au/shepparton/employment-by-industryNVivo10 [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR International.
56.
ÖzkulD.HumphreysL. (2015). Record and remember: Memory and meaning-making practices through mobile media. Mobile Media & Communication, 3(3), 351–365.
57.
ParkS. (2017). Digital inequalities in rural Australia: A double jeopardy of remoteness and social exclusion. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 399–407.
58.
Pathak-ShelatM.DeShanoC. (2014). Digital youth cultures in small town and rural Gujarat, India. New Media & Society, 16(6), 983–1001.
59.
PattersonM. E.WilliamsD. R. (2005). Maintaining research traditions on place: Diversity of thought and scientific progress. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(4), 361–380.
60.
PinkS.SinananJ.HjorthL.HorstH. (2016). Tactile digital ethnography: Researching mobile media through the hand. Mobile Media & Communication, 4(2), 237–251.
61.
PolsonE. (2015). A gateway to the global city: Mobile place-making practices by expats. New Media & Society, 17(4), 629–645.
62.
RitchieJ.LewisJ.NichollsC. M. N.OrmstonR. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
63.
SchwandtT. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructivism. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189–213). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
64.
SeamonD. (1979). A geography of the lifeworld: Movement, rest and encounter. New York, NY: St Martin’s Press.
65.
SeamonD. (2000). Phenomenology, place, environment, and architecture: A review of the literature. Phenomenology Online, 36, 1–29.
66.
SeamonD. (2012). Place, place identity, and phenomenology: A triadic interpretation based on J. G. Bennett’s systematics. In CasakinH.BernardoF. (Eds.), The role of place identity in the perception, understanding, and design of built environments (pp. 3–21). Danvers, MA: Bentham Books.
67.
SmithJ.SkrbisZ.WesternM. (2013). Beneath the digital native myth: Understanding young Australians’ online time use. Journal of Sociology, 49(1), 97–118.
68.
SmithsonJ. (2000). Using and analysing focus groups: Limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Methodology: Theory and Practice, 3(2), 103–119.
69.
SternM. J. (2008). How locality, frequency of communication and Internet usage affect modes of communication within core social networks. Information, Communication & Society, 11(5), 591–616.
70.
TuanY. (1979). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
71.
ValentineG. (2003). Boundary crossings: Transitions from childhood to adulthood. Children’s Geographies, 1(1), 37–52.
72.
ValentineG.HollowayS. L. (2001). A window on the wider world? Rural children’s use of information and communication technologies. Journal of Rural Studies, 17, 383–394.
73.
Van DeursenA. J.van DijkJ. A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526.
74.
WaiteC. (2018). Young people’s place-making in a regional Australian town. Sociologia Ruralis, 58(2), 276–292.
75.
WaiteC.BourkeL. (2015). Rural young people’s perspectives on online sociality: Crossing geography and exhibiting self through Facebook. Rural Society, 24(2), 200–218.
76.
WhiteR.WynJ. (2004). Youth and society: Exploring the social dynamics of youth experience. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
77.
WiborgW. (2004). Place, nature and migration: Students’ attachment to their rural home places. Sociologia Ruralis, 44(4), 416–432.
78.
WoodsM. (2007). Engaging the global countryside: Globalization, hybridity and the reconstitution of rural place. Progress in Human Geography, 31(4), 485–507.
