Reading Urban Digital Images on Social Media: the Case of Izmir City Centers
Özet
Bu bölüm, kentin dijital imgesinin sosyal medya aracılığıyla nasıl inşa edildiğini ve aktarıldığını, İzmir’in farklı kentsel karakterlere sahip iki merkezi olan tarihî Konak ve gelişmekte olan modern Bayraklı’nın Instagram temsilleri üzerinden incelemektedir. Kentsel imge, anlamlandırma ve dijital mekânsallık kuramlarından hareketle çalışma, Manuel Castells’in işlev, anlam ve biçim kavramsallaştırmasını yeniden yorumlayarak fiziksel kentsel çevreler ile dijital temsilleri arasındaki ilişkiyi araştırmaktadır. Konum etiketli Instagram paylaşımlarının nitel içerik analizi sonucunda, kentin dijital imgesini oluşturan altı kategori tanımlanmaktadır: gündelik pratikleri ve kültürel etkinlikleri yansıtan “iz” (stroke); olumsuz kentsel deneyimleri temsil eden “zorluk” (adversity); mekânsal ve toplumsal karşıtlıkları görünür kılan “karşıtlık” (antipode); tanınabilir kentsel öğelere karşılık gelen “sembol” (symbol); tekrarlanan kentsel peyzajları ve siluetleri içeren “omurga” (spine); bireysel öz-temsil mekânlarını öne çıkaran “niş” (niche). Bulgular, dijital imgelerin kentsel anlamları seçici biçimde yeniden ürettiğini, dönüştürdüğünü ve dolaşıma soktuğunu ortaya koyarken mekânsal özellikler, kolektif algılar ve bireysel deneyimler arasındaki etkileşimi vurgulamaktadır. Bölüm, sosyal medyanın çağdaş kent imgelerinin inşasındaki rolünü açıklamaya yönelik kavramsal bir çerçeve önererek dijital kentleşme tartışmalarına katkıda bulunmaktadır.
Referanslar
Acar, M. (2022). The image of the city on social media: Izmir Konak and Bayraklı city centers [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Yaşar University.
Acar, M., & Ek, F. İ. (2024). The image of the digitally reproduced city on Instagram: Case of Izmir city centers. Grid: Architecture, Planning and Design Journal (Online), 7(2), 363–387. https://doi.org/10.37246/grid.1282193
Al-ghamdi, S. A., & Al-Harigi, F. (2015). Rethinking image of the city in the information age. Procedia Computer Science, 65, 734–743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.09.018
Barns, S. (2019). Platform urbanism: Negotiating platform ecosystems in connected cities. Springer Nature.
Boy, J. D., & Uitermark, J. (2023). On display: Instagram, the self, and the city. Oxford University Press.
Böhme, G. (2014). Urban atmospheres: Charting new directions for architecture and urban planning. In Architectural atmospheres. Birkhäuser.
Castells, M. (2015). Space of flows, space of places: Materials for a theory of urbanism in the information age. In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The city reader (pp. 263–274). Routledge.
DataReportal. (2021). Digital 2021: Turkey. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-turkey
De Falco, S. (2019). Digital and urban spaces: Oxymoron or binomial? Urban transformations in the digital era. Geography Compass, 13(10), e12467. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12467
Freeman, C., & Sheller, M. (Eds.). (2021). Digital placemaking. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 27(1, Special Issue).
Golledge, R. G. (1978). Learning about urban environment. In T. Carlstein, D. Parkes, & N. Thrift (Eds.), Timing space and spacing time: Vol. 1. Making sense of time (pp. 76–98). Edward Arnold.
Graham, M., & Zook, M. (2013). Augmented realities and uneven geographies: Exploring the geolinguistic contours of the web. Environment and Planning A, 45(1), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1068/a44674
Halegoua, G. R. (2012). New mediated spaces and the urban environment [Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison].
Huang, J., Obracht-Prondzynska, H., Kamrowska-Zaluska, D., Sun, Y., & Li, L. (2021). The image of the city on social media: A comparative study using “Big Data” and “Small Data” methods in the Tri-City Region in Poland. Landscape and Urban Planning, 206, 103977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103977
Humphreys, L. (2010). Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society, 12(5), 763–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809349578
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0038038501000219
Kim, S. N., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Ahn, K. H. (2012). The Seoul of Alonso: New perspectives on telecommuting and residential location from South Korea. Urban Geography, 33(8), 1163–1191. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.33.8.1163
Kitchin, R. (2018). Reframing, reimagining and remaking smart cities. In M. Deakin (Ed.), Creating smart cities (pp. 219–230). Routledge.
Kwan, M. P., Dijst, M. J., & Schwanen, T. (2007). The interaction between ICT and human activity-travel behavior. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(2), 121–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2006.02.002
Laaksonen, P., Laaksonen, M., Borisov, P., & Halkoaho, J. (2006). Measuring image of a city: A qualitative approach with case example. Place Branding, 2(3), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.pb.5990058
Leszczynski, A. (2020). Glitchy vignettes of platform urbanism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 38(2), 189–208.
Leszczynski, A., & Elwood, S. (2022). Glitch cities. Dialogues in Human Geography, 12(3), 401–405.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell.
Lemos, A. (2008). Locative media and informational territories: Mobile Communication and New Sense of Places. A Critique of Spatialization in Cyberculture. In Inclusiva-net, #2. Digital Networks and Physical Space (pp. 25-43). http://gecultec.csic.es/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/E-BOOK-INCLUSIVA_NET_02_ENGLISH.pdf#page=25
Lemos, A. (2010). Post-mass media functions, locative media, and informational territories: New ways of thinking about territory, place, and mobility in contemporary society. Space and Culture, 13(4), 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331210374144
Liu, L., Zhou, B., Zhao, J., & Ryan, B. D. (2016). C-IMAGE: City cognitive mapping through geo-tagged photos. GeoJournal, 81(6), 817–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-016-9739-6
Liu, Y., Yuan, Y., & Zhang, F. (2020). Mining urban perceptions from social media data. Journal of Spatial Information Science, 20, 51–55. https://doi.org/10.5311/JOSIS.2020.20.665
Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press.
Manovich, L. (2016). Instagram and contemporary image. Manovich.net. Retrieved from http://manovich.net/index.php/projects/instagram-and-contemporary-image
Mondschein, A., & Moga, S. T. (2018). New directions in cognitive-environmental research: Applications to urban planning and design. Journal of the American Planning Association, 84(3–4), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2018.1526644
Montgomery, J. (1998). Making a city: Urbanity, vitality and urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 3(1), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809808724418
Motamed, B., & Farahani, L. M. (2018). The evaluative image of the city through the lens of social media: Case study of Melbourne CBD. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 42(1), 24–33. https://journals.vgtu.lt/index.php/JAU/article/download/1474/1170
Ning, H., Liu, H., Ma, J., Yang, L. T., & Huang, R. (2016). Cybermatics: Cyber–physical–social–thinking hyperspace-based science and technology. Future Generation Computer Systems, 56, 504–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2015.07.012
Nowacki, M., & Niezgoda, A. (2020). Identifying unique features of the image of selected cities based on reviews by TripAdvisor portal users. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 20(5), 503–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/15022250.2020.1833362
Offenhuber, D., & Ratti, C. (2012). Reading the city—Reconsidering Kevin Lynch’s notion of legibility in the digital age. In Z. Berzina, B. Junge, W. Westerveld, & C. Zwick (Eds.), The digital turn in design in the era of interactive technologies. Park Books.
Peng, X., Bao, Y., & Huang, Z. (2020). Perceiving Beijing’s ‘city image’ across different groups based on geotagged social media data. IEEE Access, 8, 93868–93881. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2995066
Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K. & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Place-identity: Physical world socialization of the self. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3(1), 57–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(83)80021-8
Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2004). The impact of cultural events on city image: Rotterdam, cultural capital of Europe 2001. Urban Studies, 41(10), 1931–1951. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000256323
Spencer, C., & Dixon, J. (1983). Mapping the development of feelings about the city: A longitudinal study of new residents’ affective maps. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 8, 373–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/622051
Tayyaran, M. R., Khan, A. M., & Anderson, D. A. (2003). Impact of telecommuting and intelligent transportation systems on residential location choice. Transportation Planning and Technology, 26(2), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/715020598
Weick, K. (1995). The nature of sensemaking. In D. Whetten, P. Frost, A. Huff, B. Schneider, S. Taylor, & A. V. de Ven (Eds.), Sensemaking in organizations (pp. 1–16). Sage.
Yousefi, Z., & Dadashpoor, H. (2020). How do ICTs affect urban spatial structure? A systematic literature review. Journal of Urban Technology, 27(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2019.1689593
Zhu, P. (2011). Telecommuting, travel behavior and residential location choice: Can telecommuting be an effective policy to reduce travel demand? [Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California].
Zylstra, G. D. (2017). Productions of space, productions of power: Studying space, urban design, and social relations. Journal of Urban History, 43(3), 562–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096144217694609
