Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
On the streets, online: a netnographic study of homelessness and social media
(USC Thesis Other)
On the streets, online: a netnographic study of homelessness and social media
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
ON THE STREETS, ONLINE:
A NETNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF HOMELESSNESS AND SOCIAL MEDIA
by
Rebekah Osborn
A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for
MASTER OF ARTS
(STRATEGIC PUBLIC RELATIONS)
May 2017
Copyright 2017 Rebekah Osborn
ii
Dedication
In loving memory of my mother.
iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to the individuals who provided invaluable
assistance during this project.
First, I would like to thank my committee chair, Prof. Robert Kozinets, for his guidance,
wisdom, patience, and understanding. He was always available whenever I had any questions
about my research and writing, and he provided endless encouragement whenever I needed
advice. I am truly indebted to him for his help.
I would also like to thank my committee members Prof. Roberto Suro and Prof. Daren
Brabham for their comments and suggestions on this thesis. I am deeply appreciative of their
constructive feedback. Additionally, I would like to thank Prof. Ulrike Gretzel for her assistance
in the earliest stages of this paper.
Finally, I am grateful to friends and family members who offered me their unwavering
support during this time. I am forever blessed to have you in my life.
iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ………………………………………………………………………………… ii
Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………. iii
List of Figures and Images ..………………………………………………………………. v
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………… vi
Preface ……………………………………………………………………………………. vii
Chapter One: The Power in Communication …………………………………………...... 1
Chapter Two: The Rise of Social Networking Sites………………………………………. 7
Chapter Three: The Many Uses of Social Media …………………………………………13
Chapter Four: The State of Homelessness in the United States ……….………………….18
Chapter Five: Social Networking Site Usage by Homeless Individuals ………………….25
Chapter Six: Implications for Public Relations ……………………………………….…. 52
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………….……. 63
References …………………………………………………………………………….…. 66
v
List of Figures and Images
Figure 1.1 ……………………………………………………………………………………….… 2
Figure 1.2 …………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
Figure 2.1 …………………………………………………………………………………………10
Figure 4.1 …………………………………………………………………………………………23
Figure 4.2 …………………………………………………………………………………………24
Image 5.1 ………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
Figure 5.1 ………………………………………………………………………………………….31
Figure 5.2 ………………………………………………………………………………………….32
Figure 5.3 ………………………………………………………………………………………… 33
Figure 5.4 ………………………………………………………………………………………….37
Image 5.2 ………………………………………………………………………………………….41
Image 5.3 ………………………………………………………………………………………….41
Image 5.4 ………………………………………………………………………………………… 47
Image 5.5 ………………………………………………………………………………………… 48
vi
Abstract
Social media facilitates greater levels of communication and interconnectedness in local
and global networks. While there has been research on social media use for messaging purposes,
relatively little of this research has focused on how social media can be used to communicate
with and among the homeless population. Studies that have been conducted on homeless
individuals’ adoption of technology and social media use have almost exclusively been dedicated
to social work and health-related fields; nearly all have relied on respondent-supplied data gained
through in-person interviews and questionnaires.
This study, which is supplementary to the multitude of collaborative efforts by
individuals, groups, and organizations focused on achieving greater public awareness of
homelessness, conducted a qualitative analysis of the acts of online communication by self-
identified homeless, formerly homeless, and partially homeless individuals and advocates on
public social networking sites. This was done with an objective of discovering how public
relations practitioners, particularly those working in service organizations, can better serve this
population. The findings, consistent with previous research, conclude that social media is used
by homeless individuals in distinct ways: to seek and share information and advice, to foster
feelings of social connectedness, to challenge stereotypes and perceptions, and to voice concerns
and expectations.
The intersection of social media and homelessness provides an opportunity for public
relations and communications professionals to directly communicate with this population, while
providing a medium for homeless individuals to represent themselves, their needs, and the
severity of this systemic issue to a larger audience.
vii
Preface
As of January 2016, nearly 550,000 people were homeless on any given night in the
United States, and millions more endured economic situations that can lead to homelessness.
1
The United Nations’ 2005 global survey estimated 100 million people were experiencing
homelessness at that time, with over 1 billion people lacking adequate shelter.
2
Due to modern scientific advances that have enabled the proliferation of technological
devices, assumptions that entire population groups do not “get online” or participate in social
media are outdated. Levels of Internet access and frequency of online activities vary among
subsets of populations for a myriad of reasons; this does not mean, however, that access and
participation do not occur.
Research questions
The understanding that, in some instances, homeless individuals can and do use social
media prompted this study. The objective was to better understand how self-identified homeless,
formerly homeless, and partially homeless individuals and advocates communicate among
themselves and their constituents through social networking sites and online forums by
identifying current activities and attitudes. Guiding the study were the following questions: 1.)
what online forums feature current and relevant conversations regarding issues of homelessness,
1
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and Development, The
2016 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress, by Meghan Henry, Rian Watt, Lily Rosenthal,
and Azim Shivji, Report, US Department of Housing and Urban Development (Washington, D.C., 2016), 2.
https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/2016-AHAR-Part-1.pdf
2
Miloon Kothari, “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate
housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, Miloon Kothari,” Report to United
Nations Economic and Social Council Commission on Human Rights, (2005): 2. E/CN.4/2005/48.
viii
2.) how are these sites being used, 3.) what are the most common topics of conversation, and 4.)
how can the field of public relations use this information to better serve this population?
In sum, the overarching goal was to determine possible public relations implications for
organizations that focus on providing services and information to the homeless population. This
goal was based on the accepted premise that “a fundamental principle guiding the ethical practice
of public relations is that organizations have an obligation to communicate with any group upon
which they have consequences.”
3
Methodology
The approach used in this study, netnography, is well-suited to researching
communication among online communities as it focuses on applying the participant observation
of ethnography in a digital environment.
4
It is especially appropriate for this study because it is
flexible, allowing for the analysis of archived, elicited, and/or fieldnote data; unobtrusive,
minimizing possible researcher effect; and interpretive, relying on context of the environment to
distinguish meaning and provide deeper understanding of culture.
5
The study reviewed archived digital communication occurring among self-identified
homeless individuals and their advocates on public social networking sites.
6
The methodology,
conducted between November 11, 2016 and December 31, 2016, consisted of a review of public
posts made by self-identified homeless, partially homeless, formerly homeless, and advocates on
3
Kathy Fitzpatrick and Carolyn Bronstein, Ethics in Public Relations: Responsible Advocacy (Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications, Inc., 2006), 55.
4
For the most updated information regarding netnographic practices and guidelines, see Kozinets (2015).
5
See Kozinets (2010).
6
The data reviewed in this study were posted on sites or profiles that are open to the public for viewing. For
example, the Facebook group reviewed is public, meaning “anyone can see the group, its members and their
posts.”
ix
social media sites Reddit, Facebook, Yelp, and Twitter. Posts and threads were analyzed for
comment length, “likes” and “up-votes,” and recursive written and contextual themes.
As stated, the overarching goal was to determine possible public relations implications
for organizations that focus on providing services and information to this population. Archived
material was read and reviewed to foster “an understanding of issues in language and perspective
of the stakeholder,” to provide an “understanding [of] actual product, service, or activity use,”
and to prepare for the creation of more thoughtful surveys, questionnaires, and interview guides
that function as tools for presenting opinions and explanations.
7
There was an assumption that social media use implied a certain degree of literacy, a
level of computer skill, and a means to obtain Internet access. There was also an assumption of
veracity in user-created posts. Data included in the review were written in English.
Ethical considerations
The ethical considerations of this research have been thoroughly considered. Extensive
conversations discussing strategies and proper techniques for reviewing, analyzing, and
presenting information were held with Dr. Robert Kozinets and others throughout the reviewing
and writing processes. The study was also approved by the University of Southern California’s
Institutional Review Board on November 11, 2016. Although this analysis focused on the
observational research of publicly available data, future work may expand to include elicited data
and/or interviews.
Some conversations and posts have been provided in their entirety as examples to provide
contextual reference only if these posts were determined unlikely to cause harm to the original
7
Don Stacks and David Michaelson, A Practitioner’s Guide to Public Relations Research, Measurement, and
Evaluation (New York: Business Expert Press, 2010), p. 66.
x
poster. Pseudonyms have been used, and some conversations have been paraphrased where
necessary to ensure anonymity. Personal identifiers were not retained and have not been
disclosed.
1
Chapter One: The Power in Communication
In recent decades, communication networks have evolved to include new social actors
through the adaption of digital components, thus expanding the connectedness of shared domains
and networks. While increased connectivity does not inherently create power, the access to more
social networks and varied resources creates a new source of power for a larger audience.
Technological advances over the last century that fostered the creation of increased connectivity
include the emergence and social adoption of the telephone (1890), radio (1891), television
(1920s), computer (1940s), mobile phone (1973), and Internet (1990s).
These technological advances disrupted flows of influence and power. There has been a
shift from a filtered top-down flow of communication to an unfiltered multi-directional flow of
communication. Most recently, the Internet and social media have provided outlets for all classes
of society to broadcast experiential knowledge and personal perspectives to a broad audience,
interrupting the traditional flow of information from a few sources of information to many
sources of information. The influx of voices in the market can offer some power and control of
situations to the masses.
Flows of Communication
Katz and Lazarsfeld’s study of the two-step flow of communication posited that mass
media, such as newspapers, radio, or television, influences opinion leaders who in turn influence
the public.
8
Two-step communication flows rely on authority leaders communicating with
opinion leaders, who then communicate that message to the desired audience. This paradigm of
8
See Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955).
2
communication flow is particularly relevant in social environments with fewer communications
channels. An example of this can be seen in the act of a popular radio talk show host
communicating his or her opinions on a news story to his or her listeners, creating a base of
“opinion followers.”
Figure 1.1
Representation of the two-step flow of communication
The one-step flow of communication, however, eliminates the opinion leader. It is a
communications model that posits that mass media directly influences the public.
9
There has
been a distinct rise in the use of one-step flows, as technological advancements allow for crowd
to crowd information sharing during and after an event. This model of communication works
well with social networking sites and direct mail and allows for targeted messaging to segmented
audiences. The one-step flow of communication thrives in the decades following the evolution
9
See Bennet and Manheim (2006).
Opinion
Leader
Mass Media
Opinion
Leader
Opinion
Leader
Audience
3
from traditional media to the Internet 1.0, which served as a digital repository of information, to
the Internet 2.0, which provided the intercommunications platforms that have been integrated
into public daily lifestyles. The increased ownership of smart phones, personal computers, and
other digital tools with Internet access has fostered this communication flow.
Figure 1.2
Representation of the one-step flow of communication
Bennett and Manheim wrote on the movement from a communications paradigm that
focused on a two-step transmission of messages to the recent, often-used one-step message
transmission process. The first paradigm relied on a few media sources to provide information to
social influencers, who would then distribute that message among their social network. Now,
due to evolving media formats, individual media use habits, increased access to these
technologies, and social distribution of media and interaction with these technologies, people
have an increased control over their information sources. Simply stated, media’s messages can
Mass Media
Audience
4
now go directly to intended audience members. Whereas it used to be important to understand
how messages could be interpreted through different social interactions, communicators must
now also concentrate on crafting messages designed to resonate with targeted individuals and
their self-determined networks of association.
It is of importance to note that this flow of communication can be reversed. In one-step
flows of communication, transmission of messages is not one-way. Through social networking
sites, members of the public can directly communicate to the mass media, as well as to
businesses, organizations, and opinion leaders, without any need for intermediaries.
Both two-step and one-step communication flows can be found within online social
networking sites. Although online celebrities and politicians can exert a great deal of influence
through personal social networking profiles, individuals do not need to rely solely on others’
interpretations. Social media presents an interesting social environment where opinion leaders
are not necessarily needed, yet everyone has the ability to become one.
Certain digital platforms rely on a two-way one-step flow of communication. This is
important because consumers can exercise power over their information sources and
communicate directly to the media, companies, and organizations. This shift in dialogue, where
any possible stakeholder, and not just certain influencers, can exert power over message content
has forever altered more traditional methods of communication.
The Power in Communication
In the words of Manuel Castells, “Power is the most fundamental process in society…[it]
is the relational capacity that enables a social actor to influence asymmetrically the decision(s) of
5
other social actors.”
10
Simply stated, power is the ability to exercise control over one’s own
environment.
The relational nature of power means a dynamic relationship can exist between
individuals, between groups, between institutions, or in some capacity among all three.
11
On a
micro-level, an individual may have resources to exercise control over a particular situation or
relationship, but remain bound to conform to higher authority. Much has been written on the
psychological and sociological impulses that drive individuals to seek control over personal
domains, but this paper seeks to emphasize the importance of social media in reclaiming a
portion of individual power particularly among the homeless population of the United States.
Communication can be defined as “a reciprocal process of exchanging signals to inform,
persuade, or instruct, based on shared meanings and conditioned by the communicators’
relationship and social context.”
12
In other words, communication is based on the sharing of
meaning through the exchange of information through verbal, non-verbal, and written cues.
Communication can only occur when an actor (the sender), such as an individual or organization,
effectively and accurately conveys an intended meaning to another actor (the receiver).
Power in social situations relies partly on the flow of information, as information
influences “how people will or will not accept high levels of inequality and other conditions of
life that are unequally distributed in modern societies” or how acts or ideologies in society are
presented and made acceptable to the public.
13
10
Manuel Castells, Communication Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 10.
11
James Jaskinski, Sourcebook on Rhetoric: Key Concepts in Contemporary Rhetorical Studies (Thousand Oaks:
2001), 443.
12
Glen Broom and Bey-Ling Sha, Cutlip and Center’s Effective Public Relations (Upper Saddle River: Pearson
Prentice Hall, 2013), 168.
13
Harold R. Kerbo, Social Stratification and Inequality: Class Conflict in Historical, Comparative, and Global
Perspective (New York: McGraw Hill, 2012), 395.
6
Because the control of information is important, there is significant power in discourse.
14
Through communication, individuals and organizations are enabled to create and maintain power
or to resist a current power dynamic. Whoever has power to create messages has the power to
potentially shape perception. There is also power in determining who receives messages and
who can communicate directly with whom. The analysis of power relationships requires an
understanding of the forms and processes of socialized communication that support the social
production of meaning.
15
The movement to increasingly fragmented and differentiated media channels has many
implications for public relations. First, the public relations professional must never assume that
the audience will respond to a “general” message. In today’s niche media, specialized appeals,
designed from information from a wide array of databases, can be effective. Second, public
relations professionals often must understand the needs of their audience to anticipate future
actions that will be mutually beneficial to the organization and its public. And lastly, the
professional must understand the environment of their audience if they are to define problems in
ways that draw support.
The use of social media can highlight the power of online discourse. Homeless
individuals are not unheard; they are under-heard. As such, social media can allow homeless
individuals and their constituents to communicate more directly to the public. Public relations
and communications professionals should endeavor to ensure that all audiences are represented
in conversations.
14
Manuel Castells, Communication Power, 53.
15
Manuel Castells, “Communication, Power and Counter-Power in the Network Society,” International
Journal of Communication 1, no. 1 (2007): 239, doi: 1932-8036/20070238.
7
Chapter Two: The Rise of Social Networking Sites
Our increasingly globalized society has developed a new communications system, one
constructed from the emergence of information communication technologies and based on an
increasingly digitized and interactive multimedia system. This system is continuously shaped in
functionality in accordance with user need. In this modern world of digitized communication,
there has been exponential growth of both vertical and horizontal communication networks.
Online sharing and interpersonal exchanges can take place in many forms, private or
public, explicit or implicit. Common outlets for online sharing and communicating are through
social media channels.
Social media has been defined as, “Websites and applications that enable users to create
and share content or to participate in social networking.”
16
Commonly known forms of social
media include wikis, collaborative encyclopedic documents created and updated by a group of
users; blogs, a collection of user-generated posts created by an individual or group; microblogs, a
form of blog comprised of shorter aggregated content; and social networking sites.
In their seminal work on social media, boyd and Ellison defined social networking sites
as web-based services that possess specific qualities and characteristics. Sites that “allow
individuals to construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, articulate a list
of other users with whom they share a connection, and view and traverse their list of connections
and those made by others with the system” are included within this definition.
17
16
Oxford Dictionaries, s.v. “social media,” accessed December 30, 2016,
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/social_media
17
danah boyd and Nicole B. Ellison, “Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship,” Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication 13, (2008), 211. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
8
A Brief History of Social Networking
Although social networking sites are a part of social media, a microcosm of the larger
communications ecology, their impact on society is worthy of separate analysis. As mentioned
above, the creation of the World Wide Web and the Internet has forever shaped communication.
Communication can now be instant, global, public, and private. What first started out as a tool
for scientists to share computer power and information, the creation of email for ARPANET in
1972 expanded interactivity and connectedness beyond the realm of its original intent. The
sending and receiving of electronic communication evolved into a global form of transmission
following the adoption of TCP/IP protocols in 1975 and the work of Timothy Berners-Lee in the
early 1980s.
The earliest programs that allowed greater online social networking included email
transmission, Internet chat relays, and forums found in programs such as the Bulletin Board
System, CompuServe, and UseNet. These online avenues for social interaction served as the
basis for the modern iterations of social media found in today’s society.
The last two decades has seen the creation of hundreds of social networking sites. Using
the boyd and Ellison definition as a guide, some of the first social networking sites that allowed
users to create public and/or private profiles and communicate with other users on a personalized
connections list included SixDegrees (1997), AsianAvenue (1997), BlackPlanet (1999), MiGente
(2000), and Friendster (2002). These sites were precursory templates for the popular social
networking sites LinkedIn (2003), MySpace (2003), and Facebook (2006).
9
Adoption Rates
Although iterations of social networking sites have existed for decades, there has been an
exponential growth of social media adoption in recent years. Explanations for this growth
include technological advances leading to the proliferation of Internet enabled devices thereby
lowering access barriers and the free or low-cost requirements to join.
According to a Pew Center report published in October 2015, of the 86 percent of
Americans who are Internet users, approximately 65 percent use social networking sites.
18
Of
those online Americans, 79 percent have a Facebook account, 32 percent use Instagram, 31
percent use Pinterest, 29 percent use LinkedIn, and 24 percent use Twitter.
19
In the United States,
an estimated 185 million people used social media platforms in 2016, a number that is forecast
to exceed 200 million users by 2020.
20
18
Andrew Perrin, “Social Media Usage: 2005 – 2015,” Pew Research Center, last modified October 8, 2015.
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/
19
Shannon Greenwood, Andrew Perrin, and Maeve Duggan, “Social Media Update 2016,” Pew Research
Center, last modified November 11, 2016. http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-
2016/
20
“Percentage of U.S. population with a social media profile from 2008 to 2016,” Edison Research and Triton
Digital, data visualization by Statista, accessed January 2, 2017.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273476/percentage-of-us-population-with-a-social-network-profile/
10
Figure 2.1
Increase in the percentage of American adults and Internet using adults who use at least one social networking site
Source: Pew Research Center Surveys, 2005-2006, 2008 – 2015. No data available for 2007
21
On a global scale, social networking site adoption is even more prodigious. As an
example, by September 2016, Facebook had 1.79 billion monthly active users and 1.18 billion
users accessing their accounts every day; nearly 85 percent of those users are outside of the
United States and Canada.
22
Impact on communication
As van Dijck wrote, “Social media platforms have unquestionably altered the nature of
private and public communication.”
23
During the movement toward the digital age, the scope of
communication has expanded from interpersonal communication to mass communication to
mass-self communication.
24
Mass self-communication has the potential to reach a global
21
Andrew Perrin, “Social Media Usage: 2005 – 2015,” Pew Research Center.
22
“Stats,” Facebook, Accessed January 2, 2017. http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/
23
Jose Van Dijck, The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2013), 7.
24
Castells, Communication, Power, and Counter-power, 248.
11
audience, but is “self-generated in content, self-directed in emission, and self-selected in
reception by many that communicate with many.”
25
Networked sociality
Before discussing networked sociality, it is important to note the concept of Castells’
network society. As he writes, “A network society is a society whose social structure is made
around networks activated by microelectronics-based, digitally processed information and
communication technologies.”
26
Social networking sites can build interactive and genuine relationships through common
areas of communication. Groups that may have previously been unable to communicate among
others now can engage in an active participatory communications environment, creating a
redefined sense of community. It should not be assumed, however, that mere participation in
online spaces and digital conversations automatically means the individual is included in a
“community.”
27
Online participation can be seen, instead, as a sort of networked individualism,
which “creates new efficiencies and affordances in the ways people solve problems and meet
their social needs.”
28
Social networking sites, are also able to provide inclusion and permit the
intersection of varying groups.
Social networking sites have the potential to provide psychological and sociological
benefits, as solidarity and social integration can have an impact on the well-being of users. When
using social networking sites, users can be exposed to online participants that can reaffirm social
25
Ibid.
26
Castells, Communications Power, 24.
27
Kozinets, Netnography: Redefined, 13.
28
Lee Rainie and Barry Wellman, “Networked Individualism: What in the World is That?,” Pew Internet. Last
modified May 24, 2012. http://networked.pewinternet.org/2012/05/24/networked-individualism-what-in-
the-world-is-that-2/
12
identity and provide inclusion into select communities. Furthermore, the creation of strong
community ties, either actual or virtual, can serve as buffers to stress.
29
As Bucher points out,
“Being social simply means creating connections within the boundaries of the system” and
argues that “the social in social media is not a fact but a doing.”
30
This can lead to the possibility
of social networking sites initiating connections rather than exploring preexisting relationships.
Given the increasingly segmented and niche quality of most organizations, media outlets,
and news channels, individuals can self-select which communities to which they belong, thus
further encouraging personal feelings of belonging and acceptance.
Challenges of new media for public relations
The shift in communication flows and the advent of social media has presented new
challenges for public relations professionals, for professionals must learn new techniques to
effectively communicate in whatever landscape an audience might occupy. The global network
comprised of actors communicating within and among varying social circles has also increased
the demand for transparency among companies, organizations, and the public. The two-way
nature of the one-step flow of communication means that the public now has the power to
communicate directly to former institutionalized power holders – governments, corporations,
organizations; it also implies that there has been a loss of outright control over the flow of
information by these same leaders.
29
Nan Lin and Walter M. Ensel, “Life Stress and Health: Stressors and Resources,” American Sociological
Review 54, no. 3 (1989): 382-399. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095612
30
Taina Bucher, “Networking, Or What the Social Means in Social Media,” Social Media + Society 1, no.1
(2015). doi: 10.1177/2056305115578138
13
Chapter Three: The Many Uses of Social Media
Advocates use communication to reach audiences to enact change. When attempting to
change social structure or solve problems of social justice, it is vital to know which decision-
makers and influencers messages should address and how messages should be framed to take
advantage of the social environment. The democratic nature of social media has enabled even the
least powerful people in terms of traditional connotations to claim power through
communication. For instance, user-generated content (UGC), which can include posts, tweets,
pictures, or any other content created by users of online social networking sites, has been linked
to an increase of civic engagement and democratic involvement in some populations.
31
Businesses and Organizations
Social networking sites can be used as public relations tools for businesses and
organizations when used as consumer-facing messaging platforms, as these online platforms can
be viewed as another media through which businesses, organizations, and agencies can
communicate directly with stakeholders.
32
For instance, Facebook reported over 50 million
active business pages generating over 2.5 billion comments every month in December 2015.
33
As businesses and organizations take to social media, it is important to note the increase
in directives that focus on understanding and reaching audiences. The mere act of creating
31
Johan Ostman, “Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user- generated content
relates to democratic engagement among young people,” New Media & Society 14, no. 6 (2012). doi:
10.1177/1461444812438212
32
Paul Christ, “Internet technologies and trends transforming public relations,” Journal of Website Promotion
1, no 4 (2007). doi: 10.1300/J238v01n04_02
33
“Stats,” Facebook, 2015.
14
profiles and pages will not increase audience participation, nor will it serve to increase consumer
awareness.
34
In evaluating literature prior to conducting research on how nonprofit organizations use
Facebook, Waters el al. postulated that three public relations strategies were most helpful for
organizations using social media: disclosure, usefulness, and interactivity.
35
As organizations in
the public, private, and plural sectors establish dialogic relationships with their intended
audiences through virtual interactions, it is necessary to remember there is an increased demand
for transparency, an expectation of useful information, and a need to provide opportunities for
engagement.
36
Businesses and organizations use social media to inform their stakeholders. Often these
companies use a multi-platform strategy to reach an array of audiences and provide consistent
messaging. In other words, companies are increasingly creating multiple profiles across multiple
social networking sites, such as maintaining Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and LinkedIn
accounts.
Multiple sites offer a variety of channels through which organizations can communicate
directly with the public. This can help strengthen the brand of an organization and positively
impact its image.
37
34
See Maxwell and Caboni (2014) for research on importance of purposeful communication for effective
collaboration in nonprofit organizations.
35
Richard D. Waters, Emily Burnett, Anna Lamm, and Jessica Lucas, “Engaging stakeholders through social
networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook,” Public Relations Review 35, no. 2 (2009). doi:
10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.006
36
For further reading on the studies which produced evaluated strategies, see works by Kelleher (2006),
Taylor, Kent, and White (2001), and Jo and Kim (2003).
37
Simeon Edosomwan, Sitalaskshmi Kalangot Prakasan, Doriane Kouame, Jonelle Watson, and Tom
Seymour, “The History of Social Media and its Impact on Business,” Journal of Applied Management and
Entreprenship 16, no. 3 (2011): 85-86
15
Organizations also use social media to engage consumers and other audiences through an
inexpensive medium in a timely manner. The interactive nature of social networking sites
ensures that organizations can communicate directly with stakeholders and allows stakeholders
to communicate directly back to the organization. This reciprocity allows for the audience to
regain some aspect of power in the information exchange. Through connectivity and
participation, social networking sites facilitate the communication in the social networks among
organizations and their publics. It has also resulted in the movement from “telling and selling” to
actively listening to stakeholders.
38
Individuals
Individuals use social media for many reasons, as online social networks can have an
impact on the daily lives of users. People may use social media to display identity, ranging from
the information displayed on profile pages, to conditions of privacy settings, to the selected
pictures used to represent their “self”, even to the choice of words and emoticons used when
creating or sharing posts.
39
All curated information, consciously and subconsciously chosen, can
be considered reflective of the user and seen as a means to display user identity. An unintended
consequence of this self-presentation may be the creation of multiple accounts crafted to reflect
varying aspects of the user’s personality to fit with specific social networking sites. Relatedly,
another consequence may the creation of “burner” or “trash” accounts that are used to participate
in online actions that the user does not want associated with other identities.
38
Glen Broom and Bey-Ling Sha, Cutlip & Center’s Effective Public Relations, 225.
39
Andreas M. Kaplan and Michael Haenlein, “Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of
Social Media,” Business Horizons 54, no. 1 (2010). doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
16
As previously mentioned, individuals may use social media to engage in social actions
with others and foster social connectedness. This can be utilized to find information from
multiple sources (such as user-generated reviews and recommendations), and crowdsource ideas
or funds. Social networking sites promote sociability and solidarity among users of shared
platforms.
Individuals may also use social media to express their opinion and advocate for social
causes. There has been a rise in online activism through networked content, particularly in the
coordination of activist individuals and groups during protest movements of recent years. Among
the most prominent examples of cyberactivism include Occupy Wall Street, Arab Spring, and
#BlackLivesMatter. Issues from animal advocacy to environmental concerns to women’s rights
have been liked, shared, posted, and commented; private and public online groups dedicated to
addressing and solving these issues have been created on a multitude of social networking sites.
In this online environment, it should come as no surprise that social groups have sprung
up around the social issue of homelessness. These groups can be “closed” or “secret” –
comprised only of current or former homeless individuals added by moderators – or “open” or
“public.” An example of a cross-channel online networking community dedicated to addressing
homelessness can be seen through the pages and groups of the Invisible People organization. The
organization, which creates “vlogs” of short interviews of homeless individuals, was launched by
Mark Horvath, who was formerly homeless himself, in 2008. Invisible People maintains pages
and profiles on invisiblepeople.tv, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram. The organization
also maintains a closed Facebook group designed to be a peer network for the homeless
community. The existence of this group provides irrefutable evidence of homeless individuals
17
actively participating in online interactions on social networking sites; the group was not
reviewed, however.
18
Chapter Four: The State of Homelessness in the United States
Homelessness is not a social issue unique to any particular location. Likewise, the nature
of social media allows for social interaction to not be necessarily constrained by physical
boundaries. However, given the necessity to provide context and meaning through definitions
and demographic data, this paper includes background information specific to the state of
homelessness in the United States.
Homelessness as a social construct
A social construction, an idea or perception created by society which shapes a shared
understanding of accepted behavior, is influenced by culture, politics, environment, and other
factors. In other words, social constructs are conceptualizations of reality; they are ideas which
have created society’s views of normality and deviance. Personal disconnections and
ethnocentric perceptions can create a sense of what is “normal” or “abnormal.”
Homelessness, then, could be seen as a social construct. It is “abnormal” to not have a
permanent residence, and certainly some societal groups have determined certain behaviors that
are common to homeless lifestyles to be “deviant.” For instance, many state actors have
implemented laws and ordinances that ban certain behaviors and actions that are characteristics
of homelessness, such as sleeping in public, sleeping in vehicles, panhandling, loitering, and
food sharing.
40
A homeless individual found guilty of these offenses can be subjected to
consequences that often result in high court fees, fines, or jail time, thus perpetuating the cycle of
40
National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, “No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in
U.S. Cities” (report, Washington, D.C., 2016).
19
homelessness and reinforcing biased social perceptions. Homeless individuals are expected to
reintegrate into society after stays in public accommodations, such as shelters, jails, and
hospitals, with few resources to maintain socially “acceptable” behavior.
The social construction of homelessness can have different perspectives. Whereas
“individual interpretations suggest that homelessness is the result of personal deficiencies, such
as substance abuse and social disaffiliation… structural interpretations suggest that it is the result
of systemic factors, such as lack of affordable housing and employment opportunities.”
41
There is a need to bring greater awareness of the systemic causes of homelessness to the
public, to challenge any negativity that social construction of homelessness may create.
Causes of homelessness
Homelessness should not be viewed from a reductionist perspective; it is not always the
result of a single cause, act, or behavior. Demographic and psychographic factors can contribute
to a homeless person’s status, including, but not limited to, race, ethnicity, sex, gender, and
mental illness. Other causes of homelessness include the rising cost of living, unemployment,
underemployment, lack of job security, deinstitutionalization, urban development, and severe
scarcity of low-income housing.
The lack of power or control in one’s social environment, along with changing social
values and expectations, are factors contributing to the rise of homelessness. Individuals and
families may be forced out of secure living arrangements after losing a job, suffering a medical
41
Courtney Cronley, “Unraveling the Social Construction of Homelessness,” Journal of Human Behavior in the
Social Environment 20, no. 2 (2010). doi: 10.1080/10911350903269955
20
emergency, experiencing one or more traumatic event(s), or refusing to stay in a relationship
with a primary income-earner.
Despite these examples, it would be difficult to compile a comprehensive list that could
encompass every situation and social factor that has been found to lead to homelessness.
Growing awareness of a national problem
Within the United States, there is a growing inequality of income and wealth distribution.
In 2009, the lowest 20 percent of Americans survived on 3.4 percent of the nation’s total income
while the highest 20 percent received over 50 percent of the income, with the top 5 percent
accounting for 21.7 percent.
42
Consequences of income and wealth inequality include an unequal
representation in political affairs and an unequal distribution of healthcare, material goods, and
positive living conditions.
Homelessness became more pervasive and more visible to the American public during
the 1970s and 1980s. It was first addressed by Congress during the 1980s with the creation of
several grant programs. Perhaps the most substantial and impactful piece of legislation
addressing homelessness in America as a national issue was the Urgent Relief for the Homeless
Act in 1986, later renamed the McKinney-Vento Act in 2000.
There are, at the time of this
writing, federal programs within seven different U.S. agencies designed to help the homeless in
America. These agencies include the Department of Education, the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the
42
Kerbo, Social Stratification and Inequality, 23.
21
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Labor, and the Department
of Veterans Affairs.
43
Definitions of homelessness
The definition of homelessness in the United States can vary according to government
agency and by determinant factors, such as lifestyle and living arrangements. The U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services defines homelessness as,
“an individual who lacks housing, including an individual whose primary residence
during the night is a supervised public or private facility that provides temporary living
accommodations, and an individual who is a resident in transitional housing.”
44
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development adheres to the definitions of
homelessness as put forth by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to
Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009, which amended and reauthorized the McKinney-Vento Act.
This defines a homeless individual as someone who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate
nighttime residence. This includes individuals who:
• have a primary nighttime residence that is not designed or ordinarily used as a sleeping
accommodation (e.g. car, bus station, city park)
• reside in temporary living conditions (e.g. shelters, hotels/motels, transitional housing)
43
U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Homelessness: Targeted Federal Programs and
Recent Legislation, by Libby Perl, Erin Bagalman, Adrienne L. Fernandez-Alcantara, Elanye J. Heisler, Gaillion,
Francis X. McCarthy, and Lisa N. Sacco, RL30442 (2015).
44
Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. § 254b (1944)
22
• will be evicted from their primary residence in 14 days, or do not have the resources to
maintain adequate shelter for the next 14 days.
45
Other definitions address the varying states of homelessness. These definitions further
segment individuals into divisions based on length and shelter status including: chronically
homeless individuals, disabled persons who have experienced continuous episodes of
homelessness for one year or have experienced at least four episodes of homelessness over the
last three years; unsheltered homeless individuals, persons whose nighttime residences are not
designated for regular sleeping accommodations; and sheltered homeless individuals, persons
staying in public or private housing or shelters.
46
It is of interest to note that these definitions do not differentiate between voluntary or
involuntary homelessness.
Demographics of homelessness in America
Estimates of homeless individuals vary due to the differing definitions of homelessness
and the complications that may arise during research. A common research methodology for
estimating the number of homeless individuals living in a particular area involves counting those
who use specific services or shelters or who reside in easily accessible locations during a
particular time period, also known as a “point-in-time” count. This process may result in under-
reporting and under-estimating the true numbers of homeless people, however, due to the
number of “hidden” homeless.
45
Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009, Public Law 111-22, U.S.
Statutes at Large 123 (2009): 1003.
46
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2016 Annual Homeless Assessment Report, 2.
23
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in its 2016
Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR), nearly 550,000 people were experiencing
homelessness in the United States on any given night in 2016.
Figure 4.1
Number of people experiencing homelessness in the United States, 2007-2016
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Annual Homeless Assessment Report 2016
Despite evidence that homeless rates are declining, some cities are seeing rapid growth in
homeless populations, and most cities continue to be ill-equipped to handle such populations. It
should be noted that the AHAR is not able to report homeless individuals who are “doubled-up”
– that is, individuals who live on an impermanent basis with family members, or individuals who
engage in “couch-surfing” with no means to procure permanent housing – or homeless persons
who stay in isolated areas, away from public spaces, or in vehicles when national counts occur.
647,258
639,784
630,227
637,077
623,788
621,553
590,364
576,450
564,708
549,928
500,000
520,000
540,000
560,000
580,000
600,000
620,000
640,000
660,000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
People Experiencing Homelessness
Number of Homeless People
24
Among the half-million homeless individuals who were homeless in America during
2016, a majority (68 percent) stayed in shelters and transitional housing, 69 percent were over
the age of 24; 40 percent were women; 48 percent were white; and just over 50 percent resided in
either California, New York, Florida, Texas, or Washington.
47
Figure 4.2
Estimated number of homeless individuals by state in the United States
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Annual Homeless Assessment Report 2016
According to the same report, 65 percent of the homeless population were individuals,
while 35 percent were people in homeless families with children. One-in-five (22 percent)
homeless Americans were considered to live in cycles of chronic homelessness, but of this group
of chronically homeless individuals, 68 percent were unsheltered.
48
47
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2016 Annual Homeless Assessment Report, 8.
48
Ibid.
21%
16%
6%
4%
4%
49%
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS
California New York Florida Texas Washington Other
25
Chapter Five: Social Networking Site Usage by Homeless Individuals
Social media has become a useful resource for homeless allies and concerned citizens to
offer assistance. Organizations that utilize social media channels, like Miracle Messages or
InvisiblePeople.tv, are designed to bring greater public attention to the lives of the homeless, and
share messages to a public in the hopes of reconnecting homeless people with friends, family,
and resources.
49
Access to and use of technology
Previous research has found that homeless individuals use certain technologies, the
Internet, and indeed social media. Such findings include:
1. Homeless individuals can have high levels of mobile phone usage and ownership, and
many of these devices are capable of accessing the Internet.
50
In Harpin et al’s (2016)
study, nearly half of the sample population interviewed owned a mobile phone and most
of those phones were smartphones, i.e. capable of accessing the Internet.
2. There is a high-frequency use of computer cafes and public libraries to facilitate Internet
connectivity, particularly among younger homeless individuals.
51
Eyrich-Gargs’ (2011)
research of homeless individuals in Philadelphia showed 47 percent of participants had
49
See “About,” invisiblepeople.tv, accessed February 16, 2017, https://invisiblepeople.tv/about/; “FAQ,”
miraclemessages.org, accessed February 16, 2017, http://miraclemessages.org/faq/
50
For further reading, see works by Eyrich-Garg (2010, 2011), Le Dantec and Edwards (2008), McInnes et al.
(2013), and Rice and Barman-Adhikari (2012, 2014).
51
For additional studies, see works by Rice and Barman-Adhikari (2014) and Woelfer and Hendry (2011).
26
used a computer within the last 30 days, with 87 percent accessing the computer in a
public library.
3. Homeless individuals use the Internet for a myriad of reasons, such as searching for
information resources, applying for jobs, and accessing social networking sites.
52
In the
study by Harpin et al. (2016), 90 percent of respondents reported using Facebook, while a
study by Yost (2012) determined that 13 out of 15 respondents used Facebook. Studies
by Guadagno et al. (2012) and Rice et al. (2014) discovered that 75 percent of
respondents used a social networking site and 56 percent reported regularly checking
their social networking site accounts, respectively.
4. Barriers to mobile phone usage and ownership for homeless individuals include practical
issues, such as charging batteries, theft, and public perception, and time restrictions on
public computers.
53
It is important to note that in some cases homelessness is temporary, and individuals
accustomed to using technology or who had social media accounts and profiles prior to
becoming homeless are unlikely to stop a learned behavior simply because their living
arrangements change.
54
A notable difference between previous research and this study was observation. Past studies
have often relied on self-reporting through surveys and interviews; however, this study reviewed
52
For the purposes of this study, specific research on the prevalence of social networking site usage among
homeless populations should be noted. While findings vary, all arrived at the conclusion that social media
usage has been reported by homeless individuals.
53
See original work by Bure (2006) and literature review by the research institute Lemos&Crane (2013).
54
Individuals have attributed social media to directly ending their homelessness, notably Mark Horvath and
R. D. Plasschaert. Their stories have been shared throughout various media. For an example article, see Cary
(2011).
27
the online interactions of self-identified homeless individuals, formerly homeless individuals,
partially homeless individuals, and homeless advocates on public social networking sites.
55
Since it has been demonstrably proven that the Internet and social networking sites are used
by homeless individuals and their constituents, the goal of this study was to identify how social
networking sites are used by homeless individuals and their constituents.
Methodology
As mentioned, this study reviewed public posts and public comments left on pages and
threads on social networking sites by individuals who voluntarily self-identified as being
homeless, formerly homeless, or partially homeless. A person was considered to have self-
identified into this category if:
• The user included a graphic indicator, such as an avatar, badge, or flair connoting a status
of homelessness.
• The user included their status of homelessness in their bio or username.
• The user referenced his or her state of homelessness in the body or context of the post.
56
55
For a comparable analysis on homeless individuals’ use of blogs, see Yost (2009).
56
Consistent with the definitions determined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
28
Image 5.1
Example of selection of “flair” for a subreddit
Source: Reddit
Research and analysis was conducted during November 2016 and December 2016.
Original threads and subsequent responsive comments were reviewed during this time on Reddit,
along with posts and comments from a public homeless-awareness group on Facebook,
comments and reviews of selected service organizations and American federal and state
government agencies on Facebook and Yelp, and a selection of tweets on Twitter that referenced
homelessness. Sites were selected to include threads and forums where current and relevant
conversations about homelessness occur.
The social networking site threads and forums reviewed are open to the public and are
free to use. Participation on these sites requires the creation of an account, which often only
requires the user to possess a valid email address.
Reddit is a social networking forum in which users can publicly communicate with other
members about shared interests or lifestyles on threads grouped by topic. Facebook is a social
networking site in which users communicate with friends, followers, and the general public
29
through posts on profiles and on public threads. Twitter is a microblogging site where users can
share short messages with followers and the public. Yelp is a site where users can publicly
review organizations and rate services.
The number of followers and members of the subreddits and other online communities
ranged from 1,045 members to over 9,500 followers. Despite the large number of members and
followers, the review of posts was conducted without the help of data analysis software. Original
threads and comments were read, and relevant posts were further reviewed according to content
to determine overarching themes.
Comments, posts, and replies from these sites included homeless to homeless exchanges,
homeless to non-homeless exchanges, and non-homeless to homeless exchanges. Non-homeless
to non-homeless exchanges were noted, but not reviewed in depth given the objective of the
analysis.
Topics and Themes
The objective of the netnography was to determine what online forums feature current
and relevant conversations regarding issues of homelessness and how these forums are used by
self-identified homeless, formerly homeless, or partially homeless people to communicate among
themselves and to others. A correlated goal was to identify the most important issues of
homelessness as stated by members of the homeless population, without introducing outside
influence. As stated, the overarching goal was to discover how public relations and other
communications professionals can engage in responsible advocacy and provide information and
services most desired by the population they serve through the creation of more thoughtful
30
surveys, questionnaires, and interview guides that function as tools for presenting opinions and
explanations.
Recursive topics that were addressed in detail on the sites reviewed included: methods for
staying warm during the winter, approaches to locating safe places to sleep, methods of finding
employment opportunities, ways of accessing public services, and processes in determining the
best cities/states in the U.S. in which to live. The season in which the research took place most
likely influenced these topics.
Use of social networking sites
Every story is unique, and the wide-spread adoption of social networking sites, and social
media in general, allows for greater expression of these unique stories. Additionally, the
materials reviewed were viewed as a convenience sample and no effort was made to randomize
or construct a representative sample. For these and other reasons, no assumptions should be
made that the findings of this study are indicative or representative of any subsets of a
population. To do so would create generalizations about the homeless community rather than
listen to the individual stories being told through social media. Specific voices can represent
diversity. This analysis sought to determine repetitive themes featured online; it did not seek to
produce a representation of an average.
During this netnography, four distinct ways in which social media was used by
individuals identifying as homeless, formerly homeless, or partially homeless were identified:
seeking and sharing advice and information; forming social connections; challenging stereotypes
and assumptions; and voicing concerns and expectations. These uses fall under two distinct
categories: reaching out to people for responses (in either a functional or social capacity) and
31
broadcasting to a wider audience through the use of the social networking site as a “megaphone”
(to manage an individual or group image or express views).
Figure 5.1
Chart representing categorical relationships of social media usage
As mentioned, communication took place between homeless and non-homeless groups of
users, although not in the same capacities. The chart below shows the relationships of
communication in the context of the four categories listed above.
Function
Socialize
Bond
Seek
advice/information
Create interpersonal
bonds
Broadcast
Voice concerns
Challenge
perceptions
32
Figure 5.2
Chart of relationship dynamics as noted in this study
Seeking and sharing advice and information:
This category represents posts that had a primary objective of obtaining solutions to
urgent problems and pressing needs. A key quality of such posts is specificity. Responses can
have a friendly, conversational tone, but differ from posting for social connectedness, as it was
advice and information, not social contact, that was sought or shared.
Posts in this category had common characteristics. Original posts often came from
individuals who had recently become homeless or who were about to become homeless, and
most included backstories or additional information to describe personal situations.
The act of seeking advice and information implies the contributors believed the responses
would be helpful and informative; these posters were actively seeking out the advice of
•Non-
homeless to
non-homeless
•Homeless to
non-homeless
•Non-
homeless to
homeless
•Homeless to
homeless
Advice,
Connections,
Stereotypes
Advice,
Connections
N/A
Connections,
Stereotypes,
Voice
33
individuals who are too often disparaged. This act shows a reversal of social roles where
members of a marginalized population can become mentors.
Figure 5.3
Wordcloud generated from 37 thread titles created November – December 2016, with 7 up-votes or more
Source: Reddit
On social forums, thread titles are the often the first contact a contributor has with the rest
of the group. This single line of text is meant to convey the importance of the post in a way that
will cause others to become invested enough to click the header and read more. When seeking
and sharing advice and information, contributors have a primary desire to have their content
read. The Wordcloud above was generated from up-voted thread titles of posts made to the
reviewed subreddit.
34
As seen above, specific words, such as “need,” “living,” “car,” and “winter,” as entrees
into the community forum. There are references to fear of current or future situations, as
demonstrated by “terrified,” “concerns,” “problems,” and “depressed,” as well as references to
immediate concerns, such as “cold,” “meal,” unemployed,” “tough,” and “sleep.”
These words convey the sense of urgency of the posts – the contributors are seeking help
immediately. Often, the post titles reflected a desire to learn more about surviving in an
environment without necessities, or occasionally, requesting those necessities from the group.
The words can also represent specific situations. For instance, someone who used the word
“afraid” may be seeking advice on dealing with a dangerous environment they are currently in,
or, conversely, be speaking about an environment they just escaped. The use of descriptive
words, such as geographic locators and emotional states, can be viewed as attempts to form
empathic social ties with groups members. Other words provide explanations of their situations;
this can be interpreted many ways, but one inference is that contributors want to assure other
group members that their act of creating the post was justified.
Some personal information was willingly shared in these posts, with some thread creators
mentioning where they were homeless, what had occurred that led to their current state of
homelessness, even monetary amounts they had in reserve. Common situations described were
young people evicted from their homes, people (both men and women) leaving abusive
relationships, people who had suffered medical issues, and people who had lost their jobs.
The most common quality of posts included in this category is the reference to activities
of daily living. Practical questions of daily functioning were asked on a routine basis. There were
requests for recommendations and information on where to sleep, where to apply for jobs, how
to navigate social situations, and what challenges to expect. Posting concerns on forums
35
targeting specific issues suggests individuals seek answers from only a subset of more
experienced individuals who are familiar with particular situations, issues, and locations.
Examples of the specificity of topics and inquiries that can be made via online social networks
include: best sources of free food, safest places to sleep, overnight parking locations, preferred
shelters, reliable washrooms, recommended gyms, and reliable Internet access or free Wi-Fi.
57
Responses to posts that sought detailed advice often provided specific solutions. Online
community members replied with locations to visit, occasionally providing full addresses and
phone numbers of shelters, restaurants, city parks, and, in one instance, a mechanic shop where
the thread creator could get the vehicle in which they were living repaired. There were frequent
recommendations for the thread creator to join a gym, such as Planet Fitness, to have a place to
shower for only $10 a month.
One of the most detailed examples of sharing advice and information in this setting
involved a member of the online community “dropping a pin” on a Google map to indicate a
secluded area to set up a tent, screenshotting the image, and then uploading the directions to the
original poster via the comments section of a subreddit.
Comments also often included web links embedded within the reply, providing the
thread creator with precise directions and sources of information. Most often these web links
redirected the user to other social networking sites pages (such as other Reddit threads),
Craigslist.com (for rooms to rent for thread creators who mentioned having funds), web pages of
service organizations, job-placing agencies, or legal information sites. However, there were also
web links that redirected the original poster to items, such as heaters, space blankets, sleeping
bags, and backpacks on Amazon.com, Walmart.com, and various other shopping websites, that
57
Paraphrased from synthesis of comments across reviewed platforms
36
would meet the needs of the original poster. This behavior was most often explained as providing
an in-depth example of recommended actions or products, and implies that they make choices
based on personal experiences, peer reviews, and recommendations.
This exchange of information (and other threads included in this category) can be
analyzed as informal educational and support services. Again, this reiterates the larger theme of
individuals asking a specific, qualified group of individuals for help.
The sheer act of crowdsourcing on social networking sites implies a measure of trust in
the members of the group and in the quality of their answers. The choice of social networking
site, however, can imply that the original posters sought peers who would be most empathetic to
their situation and provide the most useful answers.
37
Figure 5.4
Wordcloud generated from 15 thread replies to requests for information or advice with 5 up-votes or more
Source: Reddit
Above is a Wordcloud generated from thread replies that were deemed as useful by other
members of the group through the use of “up-voting,” a form of expressing agreement with the
statement by clicking the “up” arrow to the left of the post. “Can” was by far the most repeated
word in these replies. It was used in varying contexts. It was used to express positivity and
encouragement, as in “You can do this!” and also to offer preface advice, such as “If you can…”.
Another word that was used frequently was “sleep.” The necessity (and desire) of a good
night’s sleep was reiterated throughout. While not all replies stated it directly, it can be
concluded that homeless individuals are often unable to enjoy the basic human right of rest.
Analyzed deeper, it can be inferred that many responders may be indirectly referencing
38
interactions or infrastructure (such as police “street sweeps,” hostile architecture, and unfriendly
public encounters) that prevent them from getting the sleep they need. Other words stress the
importance of resources in daily functioning. “Tents” and “vehicles” can offer a “homeless”
person a “warm” “place” to “sleep.”
It is of interest that non-homeless individuals, often with the flair of “supporter,” or
“outreach worker,” posted on forums seeking information while generally refraining from
offering advice unless it was to direct someone to a service with which they were familiar.
Whether this was done because the non-homeless members felt unqualified to answer or because
they expected backlash from homeless members is unknown, but examining the relations
between homeless and non-homeless individuals in an online environment is certainly a topic
worth further research. It would be of particular interest to discover if responses are deemed
credible and useful if they originate from a from a non-homeless individual.
Primary topics of these posts from non-homeless to homeless focused on asking best
ways to help and what items and supplies would be benefit homeless individuals in certain areas.
Replies from homeless individuals included suggestions they could/can use: “socks,” “a way to
make money,” “a house,” and “a couple bucks for some smokes.”
Members of the online social communities also displayed perspicacity in determining
who were there to ask or aid, and who were making less serious posts; members were able to
separate real requests from fake requests. There were agreed-upon standards, never explicit but
always implied, of what made a response necessary or worthwhile. One method of maintaining
uniform conduct was to involve moderators. Another was in-group regulation of the behaviors of
other members through an investigation of the posts for further information. There seemed to be
a handful of individuals in each online group who acted as enforcers of group conduct and online
39
etiquette. This suggests a level of sophistication and awareness of online interactions by
homeless, formerly homeless, and partially homeless individuals that may be overlooked or
underrepresented.
Forming connections
58
:
Because homelessness can be seen to be a form of social exclusion, when addressing the
material needs of individuals, the importance of emotional needs must not be overlooked.
This category is comprised of communication exchanges posted on social networking
sites that are conversational in tone and not entirely limited to practical knowledge or
information sharing. Key themes of posts include: reassurance, encouragement, inspiration,
empathy, and alliance. Empathetic language – “I know,” “I understand,” “I’ve done it,” “You’re
not alone,” “Amen” – was often used in responses to posts and questions.
Infrequently, either because they were unaware of potential implications of giving out
personal information on publically accessible forums or simply had a high level of trust in the
individuals with whom they are interacting, a post included phone numbers and addresses (if
applicable) directly into the public feed rather than in private messages to select users. This was
done to provide direct assistance and more immediate contact to other members of the group.
While this sharing behavior could indicate less computer sophistication, it would be inaccurate to
assume all homeless individuals share the same level of Internet naivety.
Social connectedness in these online social networks developed between homeless and
ostensibly non-homeless individuals. Conversations between non-homeless (outreach workers,
58
For previous findings on social connectedness among online homeless individuals, see works by Bure
(2006), Eyrich-Garg (2011), Pollio et al. (2013), Roberson and Nardi (2010), Sala and Mignone (2014), Taylor
(2011), Woelfer and Henry (2011), and Yost (2009, 2012).
40
supporters and advocates) and homeless individuals were included in this category because in
these exchanges, the non-homeless individual acted in a personal capacity and was not
representing a larger agency or organization. In other words, posts did not solely broadcast
formal information to the audience.
Some posts could be analyzed to represent clear indicators of the social isolation
homeless individuals may face during their experiences. Posts had similar qualities of
highlighting the loneliness of living situations, while also indicating a willingness to engage with
others, as posts could be thought as attempts to initiate conversations with individuals believed to
understand specific needs and situations.
Social isolation can be seen in a post made by “Bill.” Although Bill first began his reply
with the assertion of challenging perceptions (see below) by making comparisons between
homeless and non-homeless societies, he moved into an eloquent response to a query that asked
the group what would have helped them while they were homeless. He responded that he had
access to resources, including receiving conventional forms of assistance, such as money and
food. What he indicated helped him the most, however, was a single conversation with a stranger
who spoke with him and gave him a hug. As shown below, Bill wrote that the conversation was
the longest in which he had participated in five or six months, and the embrace was the first
physical contact he had experienced in a year. This interaction restored some form of normal
sociality to his life. Bill could have easily responded with a list of material items that would have
helped him while he was homeless; instead, he chose to highlight the very human act of hugging.
His comment should serve as a reminder that social interactions are powerful and should be
treated as such.
41
Image 5.2
Response to “supporter” on thread by “Bill”
Source: Reddit
It was found that some group members would periodically post updates on their progress,
as if checking in with group members after a trip. To further this concept that homeless
individuals use social networking sites to form social connections, the post below shows the
potential for social connectedness via online social networking. In his post, “Nick” did not seek
answers; he only sought to share a life-moment, a life-accomplishment, to his chosen audience.
His comment can be seen as an indication of social isolation (he shared his moment of realization
with a community of Internet strangers), but his desire to interact with others was, at least
partially, fulfilled by the act of writing this post. His ending remark is contagiously optimistic;
replies to this thread were congratulatory and some commenters shared personal stories of how
they overcame addiction.
Image 5.3
Thread post by “Nick”
Source: Reddit
42
Despite the frequency of positive interactions occurring in this sites, it should be clear
that not all posts were met with positivity or friendliness. Some posts included indignant venting
in a conversational format and sounded exasperated at times. There were conflicts of opinion
and, in certain cases, expressive outbursts. One post, a thread composed of tips designed to
mitigate the negative aspects of being homeless, triggered more than 50 comments due to a
reference to prayer at the end. The reply chain featured extensive arguments over the belief in a
higher power, the power of prayer, and the mandated attendance at chapel services in some
homeless shelters. This can be interpreted as indicative of polarized tensions and struggles. It can
also be analyzed as a partial explanation as to why some homeless individuals may choose to not
frequent certain shelters.
Although this paper does not argue that online interactions can serve as a complete
surrogate for interpersonal relations, it does posit that these posts can fulfill some social needs of
belonging and expression.
59
Challenging stereotypes:
As previously stated, whoever has power to create messages has the power to potentially
shape perception. Social media, in particular social networking sites, provide an outlet for
homeless individuals to contribute to public conversations in their own words.
A 2007 Gallup poll found that 85 percent of participants believed that drug and alcohol
use was a major reason why people became homeless; 26 percent believed that it was the
primary factor for homelessness. The same study found that fifteen percent of respondents
59
Abraham Maslow, “A Theory of Human Motivation” Psychological Review 50, (Jul 1943): 380-381.
43
completely agreed that ‘communities should enforce laws to prohibit the homeless from public
areas such as parks and libraries’.”
60
Certainly, there are instances of drug and alcohol abuse by members of the homeless
community, and there are instances of mental illness as well. This paper does not disclaim these
assumptions; it simply argues that the public may hold a generalized perception of homelessness
that does not apply to every homeless person. This paper found that social networking sites,
particularly those with non-homeless and homeless interactions occurring, resulted in instances
where the homeless population was able to address stereotypes directly.
Posts in this category challenge preconceived notions of homeless people and homeless
lifestyles. These posts can be directed at non-homeless and homeless individuals, and can
resemble a conversation. However, these posts also welcomed further discourse by others.
Characteristics of these posts include reclaiming identity, correcting “outsiders”, and offering
alternate perspectives and explanations for behaviors. Posts in this category highlight the
potential social media presents in creating outlets in which homeless individuals can
communicate with others.
Reclaiming identity
61
Part of the general practice of challenging perceptions is reclaiming identity. As
mentioned, there seems to be a pervasive idea that homeless people are homeless because they
are lazy, or mentally ill, or addicted to drugs, or ignorant.
62
Social networking sites present a
60
“Homelessness in America: Americans Perceptions, Attitudes and Knowledge.” Gallup, Inc., (2007).
Accessed January 2, 2017. http://shnny.org/uploads/2007_Gallup_Poll.pdf
61
For further reading on the importance of social media in identity management, see Sala and Mignone
(2014).
62
“Homelessness in America: Americans Perceptions, Attitudes and Knowledge.” Gallup, Inc., (2007).
44
platform for homeless individuals to take back the representation of identity – to write their
autobiography for the world to read - manage their personal reputation.
A collective theme of posts included people refuting stereotypic labels, writing that they
were not drug addicts, and/or that they had jobs. Multiple posts on all sites reviewed generated
examples of individuals who had lost well-paying jobs during economic downturns, who had
survived serious illness only to endure medical debt and disability, or who had escaped from
violent situations. This practice exemplifies the adage, “before you judge someone, walk a mile
in their shoes.” The increased sharing of stories may challenge the social construct of
homelessness.
As seen in posts seeking advice, members participating in these online conversations
often explained the events leading up to their former or current state of homelessness. A
difference between posts seeking advice and posts reclaiming representations of identity can be
found in tone. Whereas advice seekers occasionally used an apologetic tone, individuals
explaining the course of events that resulted in their homelessness were more direct. It could be
inferred that in expressing identity online, individuals were asserting that their situation did not
define them.
Correcting outsiders and newcomers
There were instances of non-homeless people entering the group or site forums,
seemingly eager to participate, yet failing to display a certain level of respect or deference to an
unknown way of life. In some threads and posts, it could easily be inferred that the non-homeless
original poster believed they knew better than homeless individuals, or simply were ignorant to
the tone in which they were speaking. This can serve as further evidence that communications
45
and public relations professionals will need to possess a deeper understanding of the needs of
their audience before attempting to communicate with this population.
A post to a Facebook group sparked an exchange that reiterated similarly expressed
opinions across various outlets. The original post was made by a film director asking for funding
and shares to support his new film portraying the lives of homeless individuals. The post was
polite and informative, yet failed to make a connection with the group nor evaluate other
contingencies. Although this man had made documentaries about homeless people in the past, he
mentioned the use of “established actors” to play homeless persons in a film to raise awareness
about homelessness. The filmmaker was clearly not expecting to be spurned and berated the way
he was based on his reactive responses to the group. The reactions of the homeless members of
the group were full of scorn.
A total of 12 replies by members of this public group were added to this thread at the
time of this writing. A common theme was that the filmmaker was coming at this project with a
sense of ignorance; the group members felt the man was taking advantage of their situation to
obtain professional and financial gains. There were assertions that the filmmaker was refusing to
meet his subjects on their terms and enable them to share their stories personally, and was
perhaps acting hypocritically. It can be inferred that members of the group who responded,
including homeless and non-homeless individuals, that the filmmaker should first concentrate on
building a genuine rapport with the population he was intending to represent (and feature the
stories of real homeless individuals rather than rely on actors) before moving forward with a
movie that was to faithfully and accurately depict the lives of homeless individuals. This presents
an example of miscommunication on the part of the film director, and highlights the necessity of
understanding a group of people before presuming to offer “help”.
46
This interaction shows a non-homeless individual who found himself on a level, equal
ground with the homeless he did not fully understand. It should be noted that the filmmaker
posted this in a conversation setting; it was not a unidirectional message. This is an example of
traditional power hierarchies being subverted through social media. It highlights the opportunity
that social media provides in offering different perspectives to a multitude of audiences and
supports the idea that social networking sites and other social media provide a means for the
homeless to directly communicate with a larger public in their own words and on their own
terms, challenging perceptions and dispelling stereotypes.
While there still may be a need for homeless advocates to assist homeless individuals in
making public discourse and awareness of this social issue more visible in mainstream culture,
the advances in technology and the changes in flows of communication proves there can be a
reclamation of power by the homeless over how they are portrayed. There is no longer a sole
reliance on others to communicate stories, needs, and solutions.
As seen in the post below, a non-homeless person posted a question asking for advice
from homeless or ex-homeless people, yet when offered an unwanted answer, he/she attacked
“Nate,” a formerly homeless person, calling his thinking “backwards.” Soon after its posting, the
non-homeless original poster received 7 down-votes, officially making his/her comment hidden
from display (responses scoring -5 or below must be specifically requested to view unless the
user adjusts his or her personal settings). As previously mentioned, “up-voting” is a form of
expressing agreement with the statement by clicking the “up” arrow to the left of the post.
“Down-voting” marks comments that are collectively found to be disagreeable, offensive, or ill-
informed, creating an environment that is only comprised of substantial contributions. Other
members of the community rallied around Nate, questioning the judgment of the original poster.
47
Image 5.4
Exchange among currently and formerly homeless individuals and non-homeless individual
Source: Reddit
But corrections were not only reserved for non-homeless people. In all social networking
sites reviewed during this project, there were instances of homeless people attempting to inform
naïve newcomers and correct “hipsters” who thought it would be “cool” to be homeless (and
write blogs/record vlogs about the experience). While U.S. definitions of homelessness may not
differentiate between voluntary and involuntary homelessness, some members of the online
communities certainly did. A recurring theme was that van-dwellers by choice often trivialized
the struggles of homelessness. Additionally, “veteran” homeless people, or individuals familiar
with the living in alternative situations, frequently posted replies attempting to educate original
posters who either considered themselves to be immediately facing homelessness on the dangers
of the streets. This happened often, with comments reiterating the theme of doing whatever was
necessary to avoid becoming homeless.
48
Alternate explanations or perspectives
Image 5.5
Comment by “Bill”
Source: Reddit
Social media, particularly social networking sites, provide an outlet for homeless
individuals to provide explanations or perspectives that give insight into an entirely different life
with which many Americans are unfamiliar. It gives voice to certain homeless people who may
not be representative of the entire population, but are good representatives of the population.
This can, as mentioned, include aspects of reclaiming personal identity by explaining the
circumstances which led to their homelessness. It can also include why individuals may
voluntarily become homeless, why individuals may choose not to frequent homeless shelters i.e.
many do not choose to live outside – they instead exercise their right to choose to not live in
shelters, and why homeless individuals may ask for money rather than food or hygiene staples.
For each of the above examples, specific instances can be analyzed. As already
mentioned, there are individuals who choose to live in a vehicle (either a standard issue or a
reconverted model) for various reasons, which by the federal U.S. definition, labels them as
homeless. There were individuals who stated that homeless shelters were impossible to get into,
full of bedbugs, full of people who stole possessions, and in general, often less pleasant than
sleeping on the street. Individuals also mentioned that cash was often appreciated and money
could be used to pay bills, renew cell phone service, and save for housing deposits; it was stated
49
that they preferred money for the same reason non-homeless people prefer to be paid in cash
instead of goods.
Other posts reflected on the dynamic of giving food to homeless people instead of cash.
There are valid arguments for the necessity of cash and an emphasis on perspectives not
commonly addressed in other conversations. For instance, it was stated that food was often easy
to procure as many services focus on the provision of meals. Alternatively, it was mentioned that
individuals with dietary restrictions may not be able to accept offerings of food from strangers.
Posts in this category can be seen as challenges to the expectations of gratefulness that
some non-homeless people assume from homeless recipients of “generosity.” As these comments
suggest, non-homeless individuals may expect more explanation or accountability, or may not
consider alternative perspectives, when giving cash to homeless individuals. There may be a
standard of stereotypic assumption involved in “charity,” particularly when emphasis is placed
on the act of giving, rather than on the factors that necessitated the monetary need. Social media,
however, offers an outlet where open communication can provide context for behavior.
Voicing concerns and expectations:
Social media, in general, is an effective medium for airing grievances. Was customer
service unsatisfactory? Leave a Yelp review. Did a company overcharge or fail to deliver on
promises? Post a public comment to their Facebook wall. Witnessing unfolding social injustice?
Tweet or use “live” features to ensure corrective action is taken. Modern society is accustomed
to this behavior. It should come as no surprise that homeless individuals may engage in these
activities as well.
50
This category includes posts that are more formal, less conversational, and/or less
focused on developing social connections than the previous categories. A primary goal of these
posts is to raise awareness (by broadcasting publicly), express opinion, and circumvent
conventional processes in communication-information flows. They are more audience-seeking
than audience-joining, e.g., the difference between a post on an organization’s page and a reply
in a forum thread. Posts in this category often included elements of the poster’s autobiography as
an explanation for the use of services and past and current situations. Common emotional
expressions include indignation, outrage, and dissatisfaction.
With this category, perhaps more than the others, it is necessary to evaluate posts in terms
of context than in analysis of chosen vocabulary. It is also necessary to note the breadth of sites
used. Reviews of homeless shelters and services and federal and state agencies can be found on
several websites, such as Google Maps, Facebook, and Yelp, from individuals who have used
services and volunteers who have offered services. Future research could be conducted to
compare the experiences of service users and service providers. Comments and posts, directed at
broad audiences and specific organizations alike, offered recommendations and admonitions;
ratings were also provided for services.
It can be inferred that individuals make posts to publicly draw attention to shelter
environments, actions of service workers, and service availability. This can be done either to
invoke corrective action in the shelter, recommend changes in service, or inform future clients,
which shows a choice to challenge a power dynamic in which an organization providing services
determines action, showing perceptive judgment and an understanding of online interactions.
There were also examples of individuals conducting transmedia posting – including links
to other works and reviews directly in original posts. Several of the posts reviewed and
51
determined to fit into this category specifically requested the sharing of posts or the invitation to
have others join the conversations and share the page and story to have farther reach.
It can be inferred that multiplatform social media presence has the potential to encourage
a grassroots movement; intent to protest/rally at media outlets. For example, there were instances
of individuals posting pictures and comments directly to public officials’ and local media outlets’
Facebook pages to challenge influencers to take action. These actions can be interpreted as a
belief that the mainstream media is not doing its job, and as a “citizen journalist”, individuals
may be compelled to take on the task of alerting the public to the plight of homeless individuals
and families.
While post tonality was often negative, it should be noted that not all posts expressed
dissatisfaction. There were instances of individuals writing public “thank-you’s” to both entire
organizations and individuals, and there were also acts of “liking” posts that were deemed
helpful. Posts such as this often referenced prior experiences as a comparison to the experience
they had a this particular service organization to justify ratings.
Posts that voice concerns and expectations can, of course, impact the public perception of
the organization/service provider being reviewed. This can alter the actions of non-homeless
individuals who may be considering donations of time and/or money and of homeless individuals
who are researching, exercising judgement, and calculating risks in finding shelters and using
services. Posts expressing opinion emphasize the important role social media and social
networking sites can play in holding higher powers of authority responsible when more
conventional methods of raising awareness and demanding change are insufficient or
unsuccessful.
52
Chapter Six: Implications for Public Relations
As defined by the Public Relations Society of America, “Public relations is a strategic
communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and
their publics.”
63
The evolution of social media has had a huge impact on how public relations
professionals in almost every industry communicate and share with audiences, and thus build
these “mutually beneficial relationships” with them. A 2014 report by the Institute for Public
Relations showed that sixty-four percent of internal public relations departments were
responsible for the social media management of an organization or company.
64
A goal of social
media use is to provide clear, consistent, effective content that can easily be accessed by ever-
present consumers that are active online. It involves acts of listening, engaging, energizing, and
supporting.
65
Used correctly, social media can help promote an organization’s story, manage an
organization’s reputation, and improve media relations with its publics. Organizations now have
the power to publish information to a global audience at any time, and in any place.
Strategic communication of social issue
To ensure the creation of mutually-beneficial relationships, public relations and
communications professionals must incorporate two-way flows into communication plans. When
dealing with the social issues surrounding homelessness, there is a necessity to include homeless
63
“About Public Relations,” PRSA, Accessed November 29, 2016,
https://apps.prsa.org/AboutPRSA/PublicRelationsDefined/index.html#.WJ4KpkUrJo4.
64
Donald K. Wright and Michelle Hinson, “Examining How Social and Other Emerging Media are Being Used in
Public Relations,” Institute for Public Relations, last modified July 22, 2014.
http://www.instituteforpr.org/examining-social-emerging-media-used-public-relations/
65
Jim Dougherty, “6 Ways Social Media Has Changed Public Relations,” Cision, last modified September 8, 2014.
http://www.cision.com/us/2014/09/6-ways-social-media-changed-public-relations/
53
individuals in the conversation as a specific audience segment. Social media presents an
exceptional cost-effective way for organizations, particularly non-profit organizations that may
need to maintain a low overhead, to communicate directly to their constituents and develop a
deeper understanding of what issues require attention.
Relevance to public relations
Public relations, public affairs, and other communications professionals serving homeless
populations should first endeavor to understand the needs of their audiences before attempting to
provide insight to individuals and organizations and shape policies that result in less exclusion. A
guiding question should be, “How are we (the organization) telling the homeless story and can
we tell it better?” Given how ubiquitous social media and social networking site usage have
become, it should not be assumed that homeless individuals do not engage in social media use.
Rather, social networking sites present major opportunities to communicate with a difficult-to-
reach set of people to determine how efforts can be implemented to provide the most benefit.
A deep understanding of how homeless individuals communicate among themselves and
their constituents will aid outreach and public relations efforts for service organizations,
government agencies, medical care facilities, and academic institutions. This study produced
findings that have potential implications in serving the homeless population, particularly in an
era where homelessness is frequently portrayed through statistics that can remove the “self” from
the social issue.
Again, it should be reiterated that this analysis sought to determine repetitive themes
heard online; it did not seek to produce a representation of an average. As such, self-identified
homeless, formerly homeless, or partially homeless users of social networking sites may not be
54
representative of the entire homeless population; instead, they may be good representatives of the
population.
Although the following sections provide implications and suggestions for the field of
public relations; there is no presumption that this paper is the first to offer such suggestions. It is
also acknowledged that specific institutional or organizational standards may limit or prohibit the
implementation of certain public relations efforts.
Service organizations
As mentioned, service organizations can utilize social media listening to see what
relevant topics are being discussed to provide for the more efficient allocation of limited
resources. Social media presents an excellent opportunity to interact directly with the people
needing services.
Organizations that address issues of homelessness can now communicate more
effectively with stakeholders and better understand cultural context through the use of social
media. As it has been shown that homeless individuals use social networking sites to seek and
share advice and information, social media research and communication should be used in
conjunction with interpersonal outreach, verbal announcements and bulletin boards in the
dissemination of information.
66
It was found that posts frequently provided links to web pages of
service organizations, job-placing agencies, or legal information sites. This presents an
opportunity for service organizations to discover if their services are being recommended and
why. Homeless individuals may also rely on information posted on service organizations’ social
66
Stenett et al. (2012) study on ways to communicate with homeless individuals found that verbal
announcements during meal times were the most effective.
55
media profiles, and there is an expectation that this information should be accurate. A related
recommendation would be to ensure all information is current, clear, consistent, and concise.
Service organizations and nonprofits should also determine what tailored services are
requested on social networking pages through active social listening and solicit
recommendations from the homeless community as to how these services could be improved.
Homeless individuals are public service consumers and act accordingly with this fact. This
knowledge can be used to prevent websites and social media profile pages from becoming too
centered on communicating with donors and volunteers, and allow for the expansion of the
site/page to become more user-friendly to all constituents.
67
It may also be appropriate to provide
links to home web pages and social media pages while interacting with groups. This allows
individuals to investigate the organization’s services and provide feedback on their own time and
on their own terms.
The use of social networking sites can be used to form social connections; this
knowledge can be utilized to address the skepticism surrounding some practices of nonprofit and
service organizations. For example, a recursive idea expressed in several posts was that not only
were shelters dirty and uninhabitable, they required you to divulge personal information that
could be used to report you to the police. Social networking sites present an opportunity for
service organizations to receive critical feedback from engaged stakeholders who are voicing
concerns and expectations, alter practices accordingly, and build trust within online
communities to affect lasting change. This implies that social media monitoring must
consistently occur to ensure visitors’ posts and direct messages are acknowledged and/or
67
See Jung and Valero (2016) for a social media network analysis of how the Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance
uses social media to communicate with the homeless network’s internal stakeholders (members who pay
dues) and external stakeholders (non-members not affiliated with the network); Also see Maxwell and
Carboni (2014) for use of social media by nonprofits.
56
answered. A key argument of this paper is that if a user takes the time to reach out to an
organization through social media, the organization should respond.
Social networking sites can provide areas to collaborate with others to provide jobs and
work opportunities. An example of this can be found in a post in which a non-homeless mobile
app developer reached out to a subreddit to determine what features of a mobile application
would be most useful to members of the homeless community. Answers included food bank
mapping sites, wish lists (for charitable donations), and job opportunity boards; there were also
responses from users conveying an interest in participating in the application development,
providing further examples of some homeless individuals being well-versed in technology. It
also demonstrates the importance of including experiential experts when designing tools to
address issues of homelessness.
There can be a versatility of social networking sites and public forums in creating
collaborations among housed and homeless individuals. As shown, homeless individuals and
homeless advocates can be self-organizing, reliant upon themselves to creatively solve fiscal and
social problems unique to individual situations. Service organizations could utilize social
networking sites to identify potential partnerships in this medium (followed by a vigorous vetting
process).
While it is understood that liability issues may prevent shelters and service organizations
from providing detailed information directly on the site, service social networking pages should
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure maximum usability (such as the prominent
placement of phone numbers, site locations, and weblinks) for those most likely to use services.
It may also be beneficial to ensure that websites are mobile-friendly as well; some users may be
entirely reliant on cellular devices for their web-browsing and social networking.
57
Given the homeless populations’ stakeholder status in these services, they are worthy of
consideration when developing messaging, content, and awareness campaigns. While certain
industries in the public sector may lack resources to support a full team of communications
professionals, it is certainly advisable for organizations to consider investing more resources to
address issues with which their constituents are most concerned. A few examples of nonprofits
who are using social media to reconnect homeless individuals with family members and/or
services and monetary support include Invisible People, Miracle Messages, Project Homeless
Connect, and HandUp.
68
Further research could be conducted to determine best practices of social media outreach
by nonprofit service organizations, again with a focus on the crafting of messages and
solicitation of recommendations to address issues and concerns as expressed by service users
rather than on outreach to external stakeholders. For instance, the Washington Low Income
Housing Alliance provides social media advocacy examples, such as sample posts and hashtags,
that are aimed at an audience of homeless advocates. There is no distinction between “housed”
and “unhoused” homeless advocates, however, making the messaging appropriate for all
stakeholders who wish to shape policies relating to issues of homelessness.
69
68
Some nonprofits utilize social media to communicate with or on behalf of individuals. See “About,”
invisiblepeople.tv, accessed February 16, 2017, https://invisiblepeople.tv/about/; “FAQ,”
miraclemessages.org, accessed February 16, 2017, http://miraclemessages.org/faq/; “About Us,”
projectconnect.org, accessed February 16, 2017, https://www.projecthomelessconnect.org/about/; and
“How HandUp Works,” handup.org, accessed February 16, 2017, https://handup.org.
69
“Media Advocacy: Shifting Public Opinion, Building Public Will,” wliha.org, accessed February 16, 2017,
http://wliha.org/resources/media-advocacy.
58
Government agencies and federal programs
70
Many of the implications for nonprofit organizations and other service organizations are
applicable for government agencies and federal programs. Additionally, as homeless individuals
use social media and social networking sites to seek and share advice and information, social
media can inform homeless advocates of much-needed resources and can allow for greater
transparency between the government and the people they serve. As mentioned above, some
posts in social networking threads included specific links to webpages with more information
about federal programs and initiatives designed to address issues of homelessness, such as the
advancement of housing-first policies and taxpayer-funded developments. It may be beneficial
for local, state, and federal agencies to either create or update social media profiles, as social
networking sites can be a first point of contact for individuals seeking information.
Again, this implies that social media monitoring must occur to ensure visitors’ posts and
direct messages are acknowledged and/or answered. Even if institutional standards require that
the post be answered in a private setting by a specialist, a public reply from public relations and
communications professionals acknowledging the receipt of the visitor post indicates to future
users that attempts at communication do not go ignored. This shapes the public image of the
agency, both in the minds of individuals who may use or recommend services and individuals
who may wish to provide monetary and professional support.
Social networking sites offer outlets for homeless individuals to voice concerns and
expectations. Government agencies charged with developing federal programs should seek input
from all stakeholders before crafting and implementing public policies that address homeless
70
Campbell, Lambright, and Wells (2014) found that local governments are less likely than nonprofit
organizations to use social media in the delivery of human services due to institutional barriers.
59
issues. In tackling the systemic issue of homelessness, solutions must meaningfully involve the
populations that will be served to address the lack of equal representation in policy shaping. It
may be useful to create posts outlining proposed policies and disseminate this information more
prominently in local public homeless-awareness groups (if applicable) and provide a link to a
separate website where recommendations and concerns can be made privately, rather than only
posting information on the profile page and relying on followers to “spread the message.” It is
worth mentioning here that homeless individuals can vote in U.S. elections, but the process of
registering to vote is embedded in a system which many (non-homeless and homeless) can find
to be difficult to navigate. Social networking sites can offer a platform to provide information
and address concerns regarding registration in localized areas to foster a practice of inclusionary
actions. For instance, one thread post, categorized under sharing advice and information in this
analysis, included a link to a webpage that informed readers that shelter addresses can be used by
homeless individuals in place of a permanent residence on voter registration forms. While this
information can be readily accessible by a simple Internet search, the notion of retaining civic
privileges while experiencing homelessness may not have occurred to some without the post in a
social forum.
All members of society should have the opportunity to participate and be involved in
shaping governance; housing status should not be a condition for civic engagement. The creation
of policies by non-homeless individuals without the consultation of all invested stakeholders has
resulted in fiscally-wasteful policies that could be considered ineffective.
71
Interestingly, the “first online network operated by a city government for use by the
public” featured, among other components, a discussion board for users to talk about municipal
71
For an informative op-ed on this issue, written by a homeless contributor to the New York Times, see
Burnett (2015).
60
issues by engaging in active discussions.
72
The Public Electronic Network (PEN), operated by
the city of Santa Monica, California, first began in 1989. Among the topics discussed on this
forum were issues relating to homelessness. Because comments from public terminals, such as
public computers in libraries, accounted for about 20 to 25 percent of PEN usage, discussions
included voices from community members both housed and homeless.
73
While PEN presented
both bureaucratic and participation problems, it clearly presents an example of the use of online
forums to facilitate communication and civic engagement.
Hospitals and other medical care centers
The knowledge that homeless individuals use social media to seek and share advice and
information presents an immense opportunity for hospitals and other medical care facilities to
provide resources and information to homeless individuals most pressing healthcare concerns.
74
Through social networking sites, these facilities can provide even higher continuity of care by
addressing needs through online communication. This offers respect through healthcare to the
homeless; an exchange of knowledge of what the population suffers also informs medical
personnel of the needs of the populations they must treat.
Dr. James O’Connell mentioned the cyclical nature of homelessness being “from the
shelter to the street to the hospital” during a lecture given at the University of Southern
California.
75
He went on to mention the necessity of doing all actions from the perspective of
72
Daren Brabham, Crowdsourcing in the Public Sector (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press,
2015), 1.
73
Ibid.
74
For additional reading, see works by Eyrich-Garg (2011); McInnes, Li, and Hogan (2013); and Rice and
Barman-Adhikari (2014).
75
James O’Connell, “Homelessness: Stories from the Shadows” (lecture, part of the Provost’s Series on
Wicked Problems, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, October 25, 2016).
61
care – that is, from the perspective of the patient. By communicating directly with homeless
individuals online, medical care centers will be able to reach populations that potentially had not
been reached. As previously stated, this shows an opportunity to increase consumer engagement,
which is particularly relevant in ensuring active representation.
Homeless individuals use social media to form social connections, which allows medical
care facilities to directly engage with individuals. The interactive nature of social media can be
used for providing online assistance for non-emergency maladies caused by unconventional
housing conditions. Again, it may be beneficial to provide a link to a separate website where
comments can also be made privately.
Academic institutions
As seen above, the act of posting can be interpreted as providing an informal education
service; academic institutions are generally well-suited to provide informational context to
certain situations or direct individuals to resources. Universities and other academic institutions
often develop initiatives to enhance community partnerships. Given the knowledge that homeless
individuals use social media to seek and share advice and information and to form social
connections, community outreach and engagement professionals at academic institutions should
focus attention on including members of the homeless community in conversations of
governance, planning, and implementation of these university initiatives. Social networking sites
provide open channels of communication that homeless individuals may not have had
previously. This means that university employees and homeless individuals can reach each other
in ways they previously never could. However, it is worth mentioning yet again that this would
favor the most literate, technologically adept members of the population.
62
These institutions also often have student-run organizations that focus on developing
professional skills in interdisciplinary fields. The convergence of schools, collaboration among
community partners, and creation of outlets of service provide opportunities to directly engage
with surrounding communities, including homeless individuals. Since social media has been
used to voice concerns and expectations by homeless people, universities (or specific colleges
or programs) should include interactive social media channels that foster an environment that
intentionally educates and allows service-minded students from all academic disciplines to
participate in meaningful conversations with populations they intend to serve. This educates
students in the issues that are most prominent in the lives of homeless, formerly homeless, and
partially homeless individuals. Public social networking sites, such as Reddit, frequently feature
surveys from students attempting to gather responses from specific audiences; however, it may
be beneficial to research the group before posting to determine conversation tone and message
direction. For instance, in one subreddit thread, a simple post asking for opinions and advice was
answered, but a post with formal wording describing a “project” was not met with such
acceptance.
63
Conclusion
Due to a pressing need to address the issue of homelessness in America, and the
proliferation of Internet accessible technology, this paper presented a unique study of how public
relations and other communications professions can tailor their messaging content to address the
needs of all stakeholders.
It attempts to challenge society’s perceptions of given populations through empathetic
analysis and present observations by exploring alternate uses of social media to communicate to
overlooked and underrepresented groups. Misconceptions abound regarding the homeless
population. While this qualitative study explores only a small fraction of this population and
cannot be considered indicative of the general population, these findings illuminate important
opportunities to use public relations tools to improve the lives of the homeless through more
effective communication among this population and organizations intended to serve.
The shift in communication flows and the advent of social media has presented new
challenges and opportunities for public relations professionals. As mentioned, the two-way
nature of social media means that the public now has the power to communicate directly to
former institutionalized power holders. Through communication, individuals and organizations
are enabled to create and maintain power or to resist a current power dynamic.
From the findings of this study, it is possible to build on the prior theoretical concepts of
Castells’ works and the two-way flow of communication. Social media is used by homeless
individuals and their constituents to communicate with large audiences and specific
organizations alike. This has the potential to produce more symmetrical relationships, as
whoever has power to create messages has the power to potentially shape perception.
64
Social media provides the opportunity for every person to produce, create, and share
content that offers their perspective, opinion, and knowledge. It should be viewed as a medium
for the greater inclusion of a marginalized society. Social media provides an outlet for the
powerless to reclaim their power, and, as mentioned, some barriers to entry have fallen.
There is also power in determining who receives messages and who can communicate
directly with whom. The interactive nature of social networking sites ensures stakeholders to
communicate directly with individuals, self-determined peer groups, organizations, companies,
and agencies. This allows for the audience to regain some aspect of power in the information
exchange. Through connectivity and participation, social networking sites facilitate
communication.
Both previous research and this paper have shown that homeless people are using social
media. Homeless people are not unheard; they are under-heard. They have voices, and social
media creates outlets in which they can speak; public relations and communications
professionals should endeavor to ensure that all audiences are represented in conversations.
As previously mentioned, individuals may use social media to engage in social actions
with others and foster social connectedness. Individuals may also use social media to express
their opinion and advocate for social causes. Public relations practitioners and other
communications professionals would do well to not disregard this segment of the population due
to held preconceptions of supposed behaviors. Social media can be used to further outreach
efforts.
Social media, particularly social networking sites, provide an outlet for homeless
individuals to provide explanations or perspectives that give insight into an entirely different life
with which many Americans are unfamiliar. It gives voice to certain homeless people who may
65
not be representative of the entire population, but are good representatives of the population.
While it may be true that not all homeless individuals have access to or use social networking
sites, it has been found that social networking sites are used by homeless, formerly homeless, and
partially homeless individuals to seek and share advice and information, form social connection,
challenge stereotypes, and voice concerns and expectations.
66
References
“About.” invisiblepeople.tv. Accessed February 16, 2017. https://invisiblepeople.tv/about/.
“About Public Relations.” PRSA. Accessed November 29, 2016,
https://apps.prsa.org/AboutPRSA/PublicRelationsDefined/index.html#.WJ4KpkU
rJo4.
“About Us.” projectconnect.org. accessed February 16, 2017.
https://www.projecthomelessconnect.org/about/.
Bennet, W. Lance, and Jarol B. Manheim. “The One-Step Flow of Communication.” Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608, (2006): 213-232. doi:
10.1177/0002716206292266
boyd, danah, and Nicole Ellison.”Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.”
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, (2008): 210-230. doi:
10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
Brabham, Daren C. Crowdsourcing in the Public Sector. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown
University Press, 2015.
Broom, Glen, and Bey-Ling Sha. Cutlip and Center’s Effective Public Relations. Upper Saddle
River: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2013.
Bucher, Taina. “Networking, Or What the Social Means in Social Media.” Social Media +
Society 1, no.1 (2015). doi: 10.1177/2056305115578138
Bure, Claire. “Digital Inclusion Without Social Inclusion: The consumption of information and
communication technologies (ICTs) within homeless subculture in Scotland.” The
Journal of Community Informatics 2, No. 2 (2006).
67
Burnett, William S. “Ask the Homeless What They Need.” New York Times. Last modified
November 24, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/02/19/homes-
for-the-homeless/ask-the-homeless-what-they-need
Campbell, David A., Kristina T. Lambright, Christopher J. Wells. “Looking for friends,
fans, and followers? Social media use in public and nonprofit human services.”
Public Administration Review 74, no. 5 (2014): 655–663.
Cary, Michael. “Homeless Turn to Twitter for food, shelter.” cnn.com. Last modified June 28,
2011. http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/social.media/06/28/homeless.twitter.help/
Castells, Manuel. "Communication, Power and Counter-power in the Network
Society." International Journal of Communication 1, no. 1 (2007): 238–266. doi:
1932-8036/20070238
Castells, Manuel. Communication Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Christ, Paul. “Internet technologies and trends transforming public relations.” Journal of Website
Promotion 1, no 4 (2007): 3–14. doi: 10.1300/J238v01n04_02
Cronley, Courtney. “Unraveling the Social Construction of Homelessness.” Journal of Human
Behavior in the Social Environment 20, no. 2 (2010 ): 319-333. doi:
10.1080/10911350903269955
Dougherty, Jim. “6 Ways Social Media Has Changed Public Relations.” Cision. Last modified
September 8, 2014. http://www.cision.com/us/2014/09/6-ways-social-media-
changed-public-relations/
68
Edosomwan, Simeon, Sitalaskshmi Kalangot Prakasan, Doriane Kouame, Jonelle Watson, and
Tom Seymour. “The History of Social Media and its Impact on Business.” Journal of
Applied Management and Entreprenship 16, no. 3 (2011): 79-91.
Eyrich-Garg, Karin M. “Sheltered in cyberspace? Computer use among the unsheltered ‘street’
homeless,” Computers in Human Behavior 27, (2011): 296–303.
Eyrich, Karin M. “Mobile Phone Technology: A New Paradigm for the Prevention, Treatment,
and Research of the Non-sheltered “Street” Homeless?” Journal of Urban Health:
Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 87, no. 3 (2010): 365–380.
doi:10.1007/s11524-010-9456-2
“FAQ.” miraclemessages.org. Accessed February 16, 2017. http://miraclemessages.org/faq/.
Fitzpatrick, Kathy, and Carolyn Bronstein. Ethics in Public Relations: Responsible Advocacy.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., 2006.
Greenwood, Susan, Andrew Perrin, and Maeve Duggan. “Social Media Update 2016.” Pew
Research Center. Last modified November 11, 2016.
http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-2016/
Guadagno, Rosanna. E., Nicole L. Muscanell, and David E. Pollio. “The homeless use
Facebook?! Similarities of social network use between college students and
homeless young adults.” Computers in Human Behavior 29, (2013): 86-89.
Harpin, Scott, Jillian Davis, Hana Low, and Christine Gilroy. “Mobile Phone and Social Media
Use of Homeless Youth in Denver, Colorado.” Journal of Community Health
Nursing 33, no. 2 (Apr/Jun 2016): 90-97.
“Homelessness in America: Americans Perceptions, Attitudes and Knowledge.” Gallup, Inc.
2007. Accessed January 2, 2017. http://shnny.org/uploads/2007_Gallup_Poll.pdf
69
Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009. Public Law 111-
22. U.S. Statutes at Large 123 (2009): 1003.
“How HandUp Works.” handup.org. Accessed February 16, 2017. https://handup.org.
Hwang, Stephen W., Maritt J. Kirst, Shirley Chiu, George Tolomiczenko, Alex Kiss, Laura
Cowan, & Wendy Levinson. “Multidimensional social support and the health of
homeless individuals.” Journal of Urban Health 86, no. 5 (2009): 791-803. doi:
10.1007/s11524-009-9388-x
Jasinski, James. Sourcebook on rhetoric: Key concepts in contemporary rhetorical studies.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc, 2001.
Jo, Samsup and Yungwook Kim. “The Effects of Web Characteristics on Relationship Building.”
Journal of Public Relations Research 15, no. 3 (2003): 199–223. doi:
10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1503_1
Jung, Kyujin, and Valero, Jesus N. “Assessing the evolutionary structure of the homeless
network: Social media use, keywords, and influential stakeholders.” Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 110, (2016): 51-60.
Katz, Elihu, and Paul F. Lazarsfeld. Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow
of Mass Communications. New York: Free Press, 1955.
Kaplan, Andreas M., and Michael Haenlein. “Users of the world, unite! The challenges and
opportunities of Social Media.” Business Horizons 54, no. 1 (2010) : 59-68. doi:
10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
Kent, Michael L., and Maureen Taylor. “Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide
Web.” Public Relations Review 24, no. 3 (2008): 321–334.
70
Kelleher, Tom. Public Relations Online: Lasting Concepts for Changing Media. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications, Inc., 2006.
Kerbo, Harold R. Social Stratification and Inequality: Class Conflict in Historical, Comparative,
and Global Perspective. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012.
Kothari, Miloon. “Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Report of the Special Rapporteur on
adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living,
Miloon Kothari.” Report to United Nations Economic and Social Council
Commission on Human Rights. 2005. E/CN.4/2005/48.
Kozinets, Robert. Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications, Inc., 2010.
Kozinets, Robert. Netnography: Redefined. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., 2015.
Le Dantec, C. A., and W. K. Edwards. “Designs on Dignity: Perceptions of Technology Among
the Homeless.” In CHI ‘08: Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 627–636. Florence, Italy:
April 5–10, 2008.
Le Dantec, Christopher. “Life at the Margins: Assessing the Role of Technology for the Urban
Homeless.” Interactions, (Sept/Oct 2008). doi: 10.1145/1390085.1390090
Lin, Nan, and Walter M. Ensel. “Life Stress and Health: Stressors and Resources.” American
Sociological Review 54, no. 3 (1989): 382-399.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095612
Maslow, Abraham. “A Theory of Human Motivation.” Psychological Review 50, (Jul 1943):
370-396.
71
Maxwell, Sarah P., and Julia L. Carboni. “Stakeholder communication in service
implementation networks: expanding relationship management theory to the
nonprofit sector through organizational network analysis.” International Journal
of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 19, no. 4 (2014): 301-313.
McInnes, D. Keith, Alice E. Li, and Timothy P. Hogan. “Opportunities for Engaging Low-
Income, Vulnerable Populations in Health Care: A Systematic Review of
Homeless Persons’ Access to and Use of Information Technologies.” American
Journal of Public Health 103, (2013): 11–24. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301623
“Media Advocacy: Shifting Public Opinion, Building Public Will,” wliha.org, accessed February
16, 2017, http://wliha.org/resources/media-advocacy.
National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty. “No Safe Place: The Criminalization of
Homelessness in U.S. Cities.” Report, Washington, D.C., 2016.
O’Connell, James. “Homelessness: Stories from the Shadows.” Lecture as part of the Provost’s
Series on Wicked Problems, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA,
October 25, 2016.
Ostman, Johan. “Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user- generated
content relates to democratic engagement among young people.” New Media &
Society 14, no. 6 (2012): 1004–1021. doi: 10.1177/1461444812438212
Oxford Dictionaries, s.v. “social media,” accessed December 30, 2016,
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/social_media
72
“Percentage of U.S. population with a social media profile from 2008 to 2016.” Edison
Research and Triton Digital. Statista. Accessed January 2, 2017.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273476/percentage-of-us-population-with-a-
social-network-profile/
Perrin, Andrew. “Social Media Usage: 2005 – 2015.” Pew Research Center. Last modified
October 8, 2015. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/social-networking-
usage-2005-2015/
Pollio, David E., D. Scott Batey, Kimberly Bender, Kristin Ferguson, and Sanna Thompson.
“Technology use among emerging adult homeless in two U.S. cities.” Social
Work 58, no. 2 (2013): 173–175.
Rainie, Lee, and Barry Wellman. “Networked Individualism: What in the World is That?” Pew
Internet. Last modified May 24, 2012.
http://networked.pewinternet.org/2012/05/24/networked-individualism-what-in-
the-world-is-that-2/
Rainie, Lee, and Barry Wellman. Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge: MIT
Press, 2012.
Rice, Eric and Anamika Barman-Adhikari. “Internet and Social Media Use as a Resource
Among Homeless Youth.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19,
(2014): 232–247.
Rice, Eric, Seth Kurzban, and Diana Ray. “Homeless But Connected: The Role of
Heterogeneous Social Network Ties and Social Networking Technology in the
Mental Health Outcomes of Street-Living Adolescents.” Community Mental
Health Journal 48 (2012): 692–698.
73
Roberson, Jahmeilah, and Bonnie Nardi. “Survival needs and social inclusion: technology use
among the homeless.” In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer
Supported Cooperative Work, (2010): 445-448.
Sala, Adrien, and Javier Mignone. “The benefits of information communication technology use
by the homeless: a narrative synthesis review.” Journal of Social Distress and the
Homeless 23, no. 1 (March 2014): 51–67.
“Stats.” Facebook. Accessed January 2, 2017. http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/
Stacks, Don W., and David Michaelson. A Practitioner’s Guide to Public Relations Research,
Measurement, and Evaluation. New York: Business Expert Press, 2010.
Stennett, C.R., M.R. Weissenborn, G. D. Fisher, and R. L. Cook. “Identifying an Effective Way
to Communicate with Homeless Populations.” Public Health 126, (2012): 54-56.
Taylor, Anne. “Social Media as a Tool for Inclusion.” Stiles Associates, Inc. Report, Ottawa,
ON, 2011. http://www.tdsa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Taylor_Social-
Media_feb2011-1_1_2.pdf
Taylor, Maureen, Michael L. Kent, and William J. White. “How Activist Organizations are
Using the Internet to Build Relationships.” Public Relations Review 27, (2001):
623-284.
“The potential for empowering homeless people through digital technology: A preliminary
literature review.” Lemos&Crane. Report, London, 2013.
U.S. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. Homelessness: Targeted Federal
Programs and Recent Legislation, by Libby Perl, Erin Bagalman, Adrienne L.
Fernandez-Alcantara, Elanye J. Heisler, Gaillion, Francis X. McCarthy, and Lisa N.
Sacco. RL30442. 2015.
74
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Office of Community Planning and
Development. The 2016 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to
Congress, by Meghan Henry, Rian Watt, Lily Rosenthal, and Azim Shivji.
Report, US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Washington, D.C.,
2016. https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/2016-AHAR-Part-
1.pdf
Van Dijck, Jose. The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2013.
Waters, Richard D., Emily Burnett, Anna Lamm, and Jessica Lucas. “Engaging stakeholders
through social networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook.”
Public Relations Review 35, no. 2 (2009): 102-106. doi:
10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.006
Woelfer, Jill Palzkill, and David G. Hendry. “Homeless young people and technology: ordinary
interactions, extraordinary circumstances.” Interactions 18, no. 6 (2011): 70-73.
Wright, Donald K. and Michelle Hinson. “Examining How Social and Other Emerging Media
are Being Used in Public Relations.” Institute for Public Relations. last modified
July 22, 2014. http://www.instituteforpr.org/examining-social-emerging-media-
used-public-relations/
Yost, Mary. (2012). "The Invisible Become Visible: An Analysis of How People Experiencing
Homelessness Use Social Media." Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in
Communications 3, no. 2 (2012). http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=830
Yost, Mary. “I Blog, Therefore I Am: An Analysis of the Role of Blogs in the Lives of Homeless
Individuals.” Wordpress publication. 2009.
https://maryyost3.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/blog-research-paper-small.pdf
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Social media facilitates greater levels of communication and interconnectedness in local and global networks. This paper sought to explore the opportunities social media could provide to public relations and communications professionals serving in specific sectors to directly communicate with and better address the concerns of members of the homeless population.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A critical assessment of the uses and effectiveness of social media in investor communications
PDF
The importance of event planning in strategic public relations
PDF
Volkswagen Dieselgate: an analysis of Volkswagen AG's crisis communication as a response to the emissions scandal from 2015
PDF
Creating a moment of time: Earth Hour, transnational grassroots movement and hybrid organization
PDF
A post-launch strategic planning model for Hiverlab
PDF
The C word: managing crisis in the modern media landscape
PDF
Public relations as a diversity management approach: a big-data examination of CSR strategies and activities for corporate LGBTQ advocacy
PDF
The unspoken power of toxic words on body image
PDF
The happiest place on Earth and finally in mainland China: a white paper to explain what Dalian Wanda Group chairman forgot when he thought he could beat Disney in China
PDF
Hydraulic fracturing and social media: getting the “fracking” message across
PDF
Utilizing brand personality while engaging Millennials on Twitter
PDF
The revitalization and re-branding of America’s next “It” city: a look into downtown Los Angeles
PDF
Generation Z: social media, influencers and brand loyalty in entertainment
PDF
Rebuilding a well-informed electorate in a democracy of distrust and disinformation
PDF
A study of social media practices and trends in the field of investor relations
PDF
A study of the cultural environment of social media
PDF
Introverts in public relations: how the industry can nurture them into the practice
PDF
Corporate social media: trends in the use of emerging social media in corporate America
PDF
Corporate reputation crisis in the digital age: a comparative study on Abercrombie & Fitch’s reputation crisis in the U.S., China and Taiwan
PDF
Trump and the crisis of faith: how a presidential candidate built a crisis to win a country
Asset Metadata
Creator
Osborn, Rebekah
(author)
Core Title
On the streets, online: a netnographic study of homelessness and social media
School
Annenberg School for Communication
Degree
Master of Arts
Degree Program
Strategic Public Relations
Publication Date
04/28/2017
Defense Date
04/26/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Communication,OAI-PMH Harvest,Public Relations
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Kozinets, Robert (
committee chair
), Brabham, Daren (
committee member
), Suro, Roberto (
committee member
)
Creator Email
rgosborn@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-366510
Unique identifier
UC11258359
Identifier
etd-OsbornRebe-5275.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-366510 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-OsbornRebe-5275.pdf
Dmrecord
366510
Document Type
Thesis
Rights
Osborn, Rebekah
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA