70
Jenna Condie, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Living in an increasingly digital world makes new forms of social interaction possible. The emergence of social media, generally defined as Internet-based applications that enable users to create and share content within social networks (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010), has been championed as an empowering movement where people are more connected, involved, informed, and heard. At the same time, existing structural inequalities can be reproduced in these new spaces where communities of social disadvantage continue to be excluded, unheard, and stigmatised (Carah & Louw, 2015).
A number of reports have highlighted that social and community housing providers are uniquely placed to embrace social media platforms for the purposes of tenant participation, community involvement, and social change (e.g. Jacobs et al., 2011; Rose et al., 2014). Almost universally, across social and community housing providers’ mission statements and organisational goals is a commitment to strengthening communities and social justice. An effective social housing system “should help vulnerable people, while providing opportunity and pathways for client independence where that is appropriate” and as such, a networked approach that “connect[s] tenants with employment, education, training and other community engagements” is required (NSW Government, 2014, p. 7). Thus, the participatory web can offer significant opportunities to empower social housing tenants and create networked communities.
Yet the sector has been described as ‘lagging’ behind other comparable non-profit sectors (e.g. policing, education, and health) in terms of digital social innovations designed to engage service users (McCrossan, 2014). The 2014 Connected Housing Study (carried out by Visceral Business), which tracked the digital innovation and development of 235 social housing organisations in the UK within a twelve-month period, found that online initiatives for resident management and engagement are increasing but most organisations remain in the early stages of digitalising their practices.
In the Australian context, digital social innovations in the social housing sector are seemingly less visible in comparison to the UK scene. Rose et al., (2014) attributed the uptake of new digital platforms to the UK policy context of public service reform, welfare reform, austerity measures and digital inclusion targets in the transitions to digitalised public services. Even so, ‘digital by default’ public services continue to press forward in Australia too.
In both countries, social media participation may offer significant opportunities to address the stigmatization of social housing tenants. ‘Stigma’ can be understood as “an attribute that is deeply discrediting” which, when assigned, can result in spoiled identities (Goffman, 1963, p. 13). For Goffman (1963), stigma operates in a ‘language of relationships’ with others, which determines whether the attribute wo