“春天的花开秋天的风”:社交媒体、集体悼念与延展性情感空间——以李文亮微博评论(2020-2021)为例的计算传播分析

周葆华, 钟媛

国际新闻界 ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (3) : 79-106.

PDF(2168 KB)
PDF(2168 KB)
国际新闻界 ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (3) : 79-106.
传播学研究

“春天的花开秋天的风”:社交媒体、集体悼念与延展性情感空间——以李文亮微博评论(2020-2021)为例的计算传播分析

作者信息 +

Social Media, Collective Mourning and Extended Affective Space: A Computational Communication Analysis of Li Wenliang’s Weibo Comments (2020-2021)

Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

数字与社交媒体改变死亡与悼念的形态,扩展了传统哀悼与纪念的空间。本文以李文亮医生的微博评论区为例,通过计算传播研究方法,抓取并挖掘2020-2021整一年间的134万多条数据,分析并阐释社交媒体时代对公众人物的网络集体悼念;并提出“延展性情感空间”概念,用以理解基于网络哀悼的临时性社区如何转化为常态性的情感表达空间。研究认为,社交媒体重塑公众哀悼与情感表达的形态,重构哀悼者与逝者、以及哀悼者之间的相互关系,形塑出独特的情感公众,也构成集体记忆的独特书写实践。

Abstract

Social media is reshaping the practice related to death and mourning, extending space of grieving and memorialization. By crawling and mining more than 1.34 million comments data on Dr. Li Wenliang’s Weibo, this study analyzes the online collective mourning of public figures on social media and proposes the concept of “extended affective space” to explain how the temporary online mourning community transforms into an extended space for affective expression. The study argues that social media reconstructs the practice of public mourning and affective expression, reconfigures not only the relationship between mourners and the deceased but also the interrelationship among mourners, creates a unique kind of affective publics, and constitutes a distinct practice of collective memory.

关键词

网络哀悼 / 社交媒体 / 新冠疫情 / 情感公众 / 集体记忆 / 计算传播

Key words

Online mourning / social media / COVID-19 / affective publics / collective memory / computational communication

引用本文

导出引用
周葆华, 钟媛. “春天的花开秋天的风”:社交媒体、集体悼念与延展性情感空间——以李文亮微博评论(2020-2021)为例的计算传播分析[J]. 国际新闻界. 2021, 43(3): 79-106
ZHOU Baohua, ZHONG Yuan. Social Media, Collective Mourning and Extended Affective Space: A Computational Communication Analysis of Li Wenliang’s Weibo Comments (2020-2021)[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2021, 43(3): 79-106
中图分类号:     

参考文献

[1]
德鲁·吉尔平·福斯特(2008/2016). 《这受难的国度:死亡与美国内战》(孙宏哲,张聚国译). 南京: 译林出版社.
[2]
新浪微博数据中心(2021). 微博2020用户发展报告.检索于 https://m.weibo.cn/1642909335/4613864249365413.
[3]
杨国斌(2009). 悲情与戏谑:网络事件中的情感动员. 《传播与社会学刊》(香港),(9), 39-66.
[4]
伊莱恩·卡斯凯特(2019/2020). 《网上遗产:被数字时代重新定义的死亡、记忆与爱》(张淼译). 福州: 海峡文艺出版社.
[5]
张信勇(2015). LIWC:一种基于语词计量的文本分析工具. 《西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,(4),101-104.
[6]
Bell C. M. (1997). Ritual:Perspectives and dimensions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
[7]
Bingaman J. (2020). “Dude I’ve never felt this way towards a celebrity death”: Parasocial grieving and the collective mourning of Kobe Bryant on Reddit. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 0030222820971531.
[8]
Blank T. J. (2009). Folklore and the Internet:Vernacular expression in a digital world. Louisville, CO: University Press of Colorado.
[9]
Brubaker J. R., Hayes G. R., & Dourish P. (2013). Beyond the grave: Facebook as a site for the expansion of death and mourning. The Information Society, 29(3), 152-163.
[10]
Burgess J., Mitchell P., & Münch F. V. (2019). Social media rituals: The uses of celebrity death in digital culture. A networked self and birth, life, death, 224-239.
[11]
Carroll B., & Landry K. (2010). Logging on and letting out: Using online social networks to grieve and to mourn. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5), 341-349.
[12]
de Vries B., & Rutherford J. (2004). Memorializing loved ones on the World Wide Web. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 49(1), 5-26.
Creating and visiting Web memorials represent new opportunities for post-death ritual. A content analysis was conducted on a sample of 244 of the memorials found on the largest Web Cemetery: Virtual Memorial Gardens (catless.ncl.ac.uk/Obituary/memorial.html). Analyses revealed that memorials were written, in descending order of prevalence, by children (33%), friends (15%), grandchildren (11%), parents (10%), siblings (8%), spouses (4%), and various other family members. This pattern favoring younger authors may reflect the newness of this venue and facility with computer technology. The content of such memorials often contained reference to missing the deceased, rarely spoke of the cause of death, or made mention of God or religion. Memorials were more likely to be written to the deceased (e.g., in the form of a letter) rather than about or for the deceased (e.g., eulogy/obituary or tribute). Parents, family groups, and other relatives more frequently made religious references in their memorials than did other authors. In addition to the Web as a novel, untapped data source, these memorials offer intriguing opportunities for theoretical refinement (i.e., the ongoing connection between the bereaved and the deceased).
[13]
Freud S. (1957). Mourning and melancholia. In J. Strachey (Ed., Trans.). The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud(Vol. 14, pp. 237-260). New York, NY: Basic Books.
[14]
Gibson M. (2007). Death and mourning in technologically mediated culture. Health Sociology Review, 16(5), 415-424.
[15]
Gorer G. (1965). Death, grief and mourning in contemporary Britain. London, UK: Cresset.
[16]
Hoskins A. (2011). 7/7 and connective memory: Interactional trajectories of remembering in post-scarcity culture. Memory Studies, 4(3), 269-280.
The 2005 London bombings is both marked by and is a marker of a post-scarcity memorial-media boom. There is a new contagion of the past driven by a memorial culture unstoppably equipped with the availability, portability and pervasiveness of digital devices, enabling the instant aggregation and archiving of everything. The ‘digital’, it can be said, insinuates itself in the past. In such circumstances, what are the prospects for the development and maintenance of individual memories? And, how can we consider such questions beyond the traditional dichotomous models of memory that assume memory as an orientation to something once complete and residual, and thus always already partial and in decline?
[17]
Kasket E. (2009). The Face (Book) of death: Posthumous identity and interaction on a social networking site. In 9th International Conference on Death, Dying and Disposal. Durham, UK.
[18]
Kastenbaum R.(Ed.).(2000). The psychology of death. Springer.
[19]
Levine L. J., & Pizarro D. A. (2004). Emotion and memory research: A grumpy overview. Social Cognition, 22(5), 530-554.
[20]
Metcalf P. & Huntington R. (1991). Celebrations of death: The anthropology of mortuary ritual(2nd ed). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[21]
Pantti M., & Sumiala J. (2009). Till death do us join: Media, mourning rituals and the sacred centre of the society. Media, Culture & Society, 31(1), 119-135.
[22]
Papacharissi Z. (2015). Affective publics:Sentiment, technology, and politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
[23]
Roberts P. (2004). The living and the dead: Community in the virtual cemetery. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 49(1), 57-76.
Rheingold (1993) and others have described the potential for increased connectedness and community in cyberspace, but critics have charged that the Web increases social isolation rather than fostering interpersonal relationships. The present article explores how creating and visiting Web memorials (activities that initially appear isolating) affect the bereaved. Data from three studies on Web memorialization (descriptions of Web memorials, guestbook entries, and a survey of Web memorial authors) are used to examine three aspects of bereavement community: continuing bonds with the dead, strengthening existing relationships among the living, and creating new communities of the bereaved in cyberspace. Analysis suggests that rather than serving as a poor substitute for traditional bereavement activities, Web memorialization is a valued addition, allowing the bereaved to enhance their relationship with the dead and to increase and deepen their connections with others who have suffered a loss.
[24]
Rothaupt J. W., & Becker K. (2007). A literature review of Western bereavement theory: From decathecting to continuing bonds. The Family Journal, 15(1), 6-15.
Theories of bereavement continue to change and develop. This literature review explores the history of Western bereavement theories, beginning with Freud’s grief work, moving to the stage theories, and concluding with current constructivist thought of making meaning and continuing bonds with the deceased. Special consideration is given to gender and multicultural aspects of grief and loss. The review concludes with a discussion of the role of couple and family counselors.
[25]
Sofka C. J. (2009). Adolescents, technology, and the internet: Coping with loss in the digital world. Adolescent encounters with death, bereavement, and coping, 155-174.
[26]
Terzis G. (2015). Death trends: Hashtag activism and the rise of online grief. Kill Your Darlings, (22), 9-24.
[27]
Unruh D. R. (1983). Death and personal history: Strategies of identity preservation. Social Problems, 30(3), 340-351.
[28]
Walter T. (2001). From cathedral to supermarket: Mourning, silence and solidarity. The Sociological Review, 49(4), 494-511.
Where do mobile, individualistic members of modern Britain spontaneously congregate, eg, for public mourning, and what does this tell us about the construction of solidarity and a sense of society? Where flowers were laid and books of condolence provided after the death of Princess Diana in 1997 provides a case study. A survey of 147 cities, towns and villages found that churches were important in cities and villages, but elsewhere, town halls, war memorials, shops and public buildings provided the magnets to bring people together. The role of war memorials and supermarkets is then examined in an analysis of the 1995 revival of the 11th November silence for the war dead. This indicates a) the payoff for companies in showing that they care, b) the importance of practical logistics of space and time. In a plural and secular society, ritual ‘words against death’ become ‘silences against death'. These congregations of contemporary nomads may not be full-blown Durkheimian rites, but they are a representation of existing society at the same time as representing popular hope for a better society.
[29]
Walter T. (2015). New mourners, old mourners: Online memorial culture as a chapter in the history of mourning. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 21(1-2), 10-24.
[30]
Walter T., Hourizi R., Moncur W., & Pitsillides S. (2012). Does the internet change how we die and mourn? Overview and analysis. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 64(4), 275-302.
[31]
Williams R. (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

注释 [Notes]

1. 李文亮是武汉市中心医院的一名眼科医生,中共党员。2019年12月30日,李文亮在微信同学群转发诊断书图片并提醒亲友注意防范,被“训诫”,他坚持工作,2月1日被确诊罹患新冠肺炎,2月6日-7日病情恶化、经抢救无效去世,引发巨大的公众悲痛、哀悼与同情。

2. 2020年2月1日10:41发出生前最后一条公开发表的微博“今天核酸检测结果阳性,尘埃落定,终于确诊了 ”,网址 https://weibo.com/1139098205/Is9M7taaY

3. 在本文语境下,该“树洞”是开放的。

4. 本研究采取每两个月滚动抓取的策略。需要注意,可能有评论因被删除而无法获取。

5. 保留了“老李”“文亮”等亲切称呼。

6. 为节约篇幅,后续词汇比例未再报告。

7. 需要指出,在关于公众人物去世的社交媒体哀悼中,并不总是呈现情感的一致性,可能存在争议与冲突。未来研究可以细化这方面的分析。

8. 与以往论文写作不同,本研究初始并未过多考虑“理论框架”的问题,而是希望与一个逝去的生命对话。2020年的那个深夜,激发无数人的心灵震动与强烈的情感冲击,我们深深感受到这种触动与冲击,因此不由自主地去阅读李文亮微博下的评论与留言。令人惊讶的是,对他的怀念与倾诉,并未随着时间明显地流逝,每天仍然有那么多人和他说一声“早安”,道一句“晚安”,从中可以看到中国人朴素而又令人感动的情感流动。这种朴素的情感,何尝不是家国天下中不可忽视、并非无足轻重的部分。笔者希望所写下的这篇文字,不仅是学术意义上的“论文”,更是与读者和自己对话,希望记住这一段难忘的国家历史、普通人的历史,也是我们自己的心灵史。正因为此,我们也没有匆忙地在2020年新冠疫情期间写就本文,而是时时阅读网民的评论,并在一年之际回望与分析研究。写下这段不那么“学术”的话,以为纪念。

9. 感谢微热点研究院、高威、刘益东、杨程、以及闪雪萌等对本研究的支持帮助。

基金

国家社科基金重大项目“智能时代重大舆情和突发事件舆论规律及治理研究”(20ZDA060)
国家自然科学基金重点项目(71731004)
国家社科基金重大项目(19ZDA324)
上海市科委重点项目(17JC1420200)
复旦大学上海新媒体实验中心项目。

PDF(2168 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/