![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Scholarship of counterpublics has long illuminated the rhetorical dynamics whereby the dominant public excludes marginalized groups from the public sphere and labels them undeserving of coexistence. However, the hypertextual architecture of the internet upends this inside–outside distinction, inverting challenges to and opportunities for a counterpublic. As illustrated by the course of “RaceFail ’09,” a debate over cultural appropriation and racism in online science fiction and fantasy fandom, the internet’s architecture makes it easy for a counterpublic to enter and draw attention from the broad public but much more difficult to maintain separation and preserve its boundaries from unwanted encroachment. Here I reread the norms of inclusion and transparency as historically specific constructs of canonical public sphere theories, and propose a consideration of particular challenges that counterpublics encounter online, including imposed labor, difficulty of withdrawal, and unwanted attention. I end the article with a proposal for civil inattention as a potential ethic for coexistence of publics and counterpublics on the internet.
Acknowledgement
I am grateful for the feedback I received from Robin Anne Reid, Cara Finnegan, Anita Mixon, Mary Stuckey, and two anonymous reviewers. Earlier versions of this work were presented at the 2017 International Communication Association Pre-Conference on “Varieties of Publics and Counterpublics,” at the 2018 Rhetoric Society of America Biennial Conference, and at the 2018 National Communication Association Annual Conference.
Notes
1. Jay Lake, “Another Shot at Thinking about the Other,” JayLake, January 8, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, http://jaylake.livejournal.com/1692287.html
2. Matociquala, “whatever you’re doing, you’re probably wrong,” Throw Another Bear in the Canoe, January 12, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, http://matociquala.livejournal.com/1544111.html The online posts cited in this article sometimes include ungrammatical expressions or punctuation, or incorrect usage, but I did not correct them, in order to preserve the original style and tone. All the bold and italicized phrases are in the original.
3. The “real” racial identity of a contributor was often an object of contention. Some authors who outed PoC writers questioned the “Black” or “Indian” identity of prominent contributors in the debate as a way of questioning the legitimacy of their arguments. In this article, I use the self-presentation of each writer’s racial and gender identity. When the gender is unclear, I use singular “they.” In identifying author names, I use real names when the author broadly uses (and is referred to by) a legal name. If the author largely goes by a pseudonym, I use the pseudonym.
4. Avalon’s Willow, “Open Letter: To Elizabeth Bear,” Seeking Avalon, January 13, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, http://seeking-avalon.blogspot.com/2009/01/open-letter-to-elizabeth-bear.html
5. PoC writer Rydra Wong compiled the RaceFail debate, and Liz Henry identified the number of unique usernames. Sarah N. Gatson and Robin Anne Reid, “Editorial: Race and Ethnicity in Fandom,” Transformative Works and Cultures 8 (2011): para. 3.3, http://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/article/view/392/252
6. To name a few, “Racefail,” Geek Feminism Wiki, Accessed September 26, 2014, http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Racefail; “RaceFail ’09,” Fanlore, Accessed October 19, 2018, https://fanlore.org/wiki/RaceFail; “Fan History Wiki: The Fandom History Resource,” Fanlore, Accessed October 19, 2018, https://fanlore.org/wiki/Fan_History_Wiki; Micole, “Ambling along the Aqueduct: Cultural Appropriation Debate of DOOM 2009: Update,” Ambling along the Aqueduct, January 22, 2009, http://aqueductpress.blogspot.com/2009/01/cultural-appropriation-debate-of-doom.html
7. For instance, Sarah N. Gatson and Robin Anne Reid, eds., “Special Issue on Race and Ethnicity in Fandom,” Transformative Works and Cultures 8 (2011), http://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/issue/view/9; Isiah Lavender III, ed., Black and Brown Planets: The Politics of Race in Science Fiction (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2014); Helen Young, Race and Popular Fantasy Literature: Habits of Whiteness (New York: Routledge, 2016).
8. Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998 [1958]), 50; John Dewey, The Public and Its Problems (Athens, OH: Swallow Press, 1954 [1927]), 213; Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger and Frederick G. Lawrence (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989 [1962]), 30.
9. Nancy Fraser, “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy,” in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. Craig Calhoun (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992), 123.
10. Michael Warner, Publics and Counterpublics (New York: Zone Books, 2002), 73.
11. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1983), 25.
12. Habermas, The Structural Transformation, 56.
13. Daniel C. Brouwer, “ACT-ing up in Congressional Hearings,” in Counterpublics and the State, ed. Robert Asen and Daniel C. Brouwer (Albany: SUNY Press, 2001), 87–110.
14. Lisa M. Corrigan and Amanda N. Edgar, “‘Not Just the Levees Broke’: Jazz Vernacular and the Rhetoric of the Dispossessed in Spike Lee’s When the Levees Broke,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 12, no. 1 (2015): 83–101; Kent A. Ono and John M. Sloop, “The Critique of Vernacular Discourse,” Communication Monographs 62, no. 1 (1995): 19–46.
15. Phaedra C. Pezzullo, “Resisting ‘National Breast Cancer Awareness Month’: The Rhetoric of Counterpublics and Their Cultural Performances,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 89, no. 4 (2003): 361.
16. For instance, Claudia A. Anguiano and Karma R. Chávez, “DREAMers’ Discourse: Young Latino/a Immigrants and the Naturalization of the American Dream,” in Latina/o Discourse in Vernacular Spaces: Somos de Una Voz?, ed. Michelle A. Holling and Bernadette M. Calafell (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011), 81–99; Lynn Schofield Clark, “Participants on the Margins: #BlackLivesMatter and the Role that Shared Artifacts of Engagement Played among Minoritized Political Newcomers on Snapchat, Facebook, and Twitter,” International Journal of Communication 10, (2016): 235–53; Stine Eckert and Kalyani Chadha, “Muslim Bloggers in Germany: An Emerging Counterpublic,” Media, Culture & Society 35, no. 8 (2013): 926–42; Sarah J. Jackson and Brooke Foucault Welles, “Hijacking #myNYPD: Social Media Dissent and Networked Counterpublics,” Journal of Communication 65, no. 6 (2015): 932–52; Jiyeon Kang, “A Volatile Public: The 2009 Whole Foods Boycott on Facebook,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56, no. 4 (2012): 562–77; Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations (New York: Penguin Press, 2008).
17. Zizi A. Papacharissi, A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age (Cambridge: Polity, 2010), 52.
For further discussions about the erosion of public–private boundaries, see Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007); W. Lance Bennett and Alexandra Segerberg, The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014); Patricia G. Lange, “Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, no. 1 (2007): 361–80; Brian D. Loader, Ariadne Vromen, and Michael A. Xenos. “The Networked Young Citizen: Social Media, Political Participation and Civic Engagement,” Information, Communication & Society 17, no. 2 (2014): 143–50.
18. John Keane, “Monitory Democracy and Media-Saturated Societies,” Griffith Review no. 24 (Winter 2009): 16.
Similarly, media scholar Manuel Castells argues that “scandal politics” has become routinized in the era of digital media, and rhetorical scholar Damien Pfister notes that digital media constitute a “cultural technology of publicity” that enables marginalized groups to reach the public. The “cultural ignition process” that I proposed elsewhere attends to online activism’s transformative influence on mainstream politics. Manuel Castells, Communication Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 240; Damien Smith Pfister, Networked Media, Networked Rhetorics: Attention and Deliberation in the Early Blogosphere (University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 2014), 20; Jiyeon Kang, Igniting the Internet: Youth and Activism in Postauthoritarian South Korea (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2016).
19. Tiziana Terranova, “Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy,” Social Text 63, no. 2 (2000): 33–58. For more discussion of digital capitalism, see Mark Andrejevic, “The Kinder, Gentler Gaze of Big Brother: Reality TV in the Era of Digital Capitalism,” New Media & Society 4, no. 2 (2002): 251–70; Jodi Dean, “Communicative Capitalism: Circulation and the Foreclosure of Politics,” Cultural Politics 1, no. 1 (2005): 51–74.
Media scholar Paul Booth conceptualizes “fan labor” as a subset of free labor, referring to fans’ work in digital fandom which generates commentaries on a cultural product, gives feedback to the producer, and even composes fan fiction. Paul Booth, Playing Fans: Negotiating Fandom and Media in the Digital Age (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2015), 54.
20. Lisa Nakamura, “The Unwanted Labour of Social Media: Women of Colour Call out Culture as Venture Community Management,” New Formations 86 (2015): 106.
21. Nakamura, “The Unwanted Labour,” 107.
22. Nakamura, “The Unwanted Labour,” 111.
23. Jodi Dean, Publicity’s Secret: How Technoculture Capitalizes on Democracy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002).
24. Dewey, The Public and Its Problems, 97.
25. Robert Asen, “Neoliberalism, the Public Sphere, and a Public Good,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 103, no. 4 (2017): 329–49. See also Asen, “The Multiple Mr. Dewey: Multiple Publics and Permeable Borders in John Dewey’s Theory of the Public Sphere,” Argumentation and Advocacy 39, no. 3 (2003): 174–88.
26. Arendt, The Human Condition, 199.
27. Dean, Publicity’s Secret, 29.
28. Habermas, The Structural Transformation, 35. This passage is also cited in Dean, Publicity’s Secret, 29.
29. Joan B. Landes, “Further Thoughts on the Public/Private Distinction,” Journal of Women’s History 15, no. 2 (2003): 28–39; Mary P. Ryan, Women in Public: Between Banners and Ballots, 1825–1880 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992).
30. Bruce Robbins, “The Public as Phantom,” in The Phantom Public Sphere, ed. Bruce Robbins (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), xvi.
31. Catherine R. Squires, “The Black Press and the State: Attracting Unwanted (?) Attention,” in Counterpublics and the State, ed. Robert Asen and Daniel C. Brouwer (Albany: SUNY Press, 2001), 111. Karma Chavez similarly maintains that enclaves are critical for activist counterpublics to “invent rhetorical strategies to publicly challenge oppressive rhetoric or to create new imaginaries for the groups and issues.” Karma R. Chávez, “Counter-Public Enclaves and Understanding the Function of Rhetoric in Social Movement Coalition-Building,” Communication Quarterly 59, no. 1 (2011): 2.
32. Daniel J. Solove, “Speech, Privacy, and Reputation on the Internet,” in The Offensive Internet Speech, Privacy, and Reputation, ed. Saul Levmore and Martha C. Nussbaum (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010), 15–30. For instance, after the Court of Justice of the European Union acknowledged the “right to be forgotten” in 2014, Google received more than 650,000 requests to remove certain websites from its search results. The United States does not yet recognize the right to be forgotten. James Doubek, “Google Has Received 650,000 ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Requests since 2014,” NPR, February 28, 2018, https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/28/589411543/google-received-650-000-right-to-be-forgotten-requests-since-2014.
33. Christian Fuchs, “Political Economy and Surveillance Theory,” Critical Sociology 39, no. 5 (2013): 685.
34. Mark Andrejevic, “WikiLeaks, Surveillance, and Transparency,” International Journal of Communication 8 (2014): 2626.
35. Prominent Black science fiction writer Samuel R. Delany (no relation to Martin Delany) offers this narrative in an influential article. Samuel R. Delany, “Racism and Science Fiction,” New York Review of Science Fiction, August 1998, http://www.nyrsf.com/racism-and-science-fiction-.html.
36. Kodwo Eshun, “Further Considerations of Afrofuturism,” CR: The New Centennial Review 3, no. 2 (2003): 297, 289.
37. Jessica Langer, Postcolonialism and Science Fiction (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 2.
38. This unique inclusion–separation is also found on Black Twitter. See André Brock, “From the Blackhand Side: Twitter as a Cultural Conversation,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56, no. 4 (2012): 529–49.
39. Lori Kido Lopez, “Fan Activists and the Politics of Race in The Last Airbender,” International Journal of Cultural Studies 15, no. 5 (2012): 431–45. See also Henry Jenkins, Sam Ford, and Joshua Green, Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture (New York: NYU Press, 2013), 171–72.
40. Mel Stanfill, “The Unbearable Whiteness of Fandom and Fan Studies,” in A Companion to Media Fandom and Fan Studies, ed. Paul Booth (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2018), 306.
41. Deepa D, “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons,” Deepa D’s Blog, January 13, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, https://archive.is/bwQPl
42. Ibid.
43. Google search results respectively using “Deepa D, ‘I Didn’t Dream of Dragons’” and “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons,” Accessed July 18, 2018.
44. Bossymarmalade, comment on Deepa D, “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons,” January 14, 2009, Accessed November 9, 2018, https://archive.is/bwQPl
45. Yasaman, comment on Deepa D, “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons,” January 14, 2009. November 9, 2018, https://archive.is/bwQPl.
46. Gatson and Reid, “Editorial,” para. 4.1.
47. Matociquala, “real magic can never be made by offering up someone else’s liver,” Throw Another Bear in the Canoe, last modified January 14, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, https://matociquala.livejournal.com/1544999.html.
48. Stewardess, “How to Use White Privilege to Make Racism Disappear,” Stewardess, January 31, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, http://stewardess.livejournal.com/293653.html.
49. Cdguyhall, “Seems an overreaction,” response to Bear’s “real magic,” January 14, 2009.
50. Arielstarshadow, comment on Matociquala, “real magic,” January 14, 2009.
51. Replies to Cdguyhall, “Seems an overreaction.”
52. Nakamura, “The Unwanted Labour,” 111.
53. Rachel Alicia Griffin, “I AM an Angry Black Woman: Black Feminist Autoethnography, Voice, and Resistance,” Women’s Studies in Communication 35, no. 2 (2012): 138–57.
54. Comments on Matociquala, “real magic,” January 14.
55. Matociquala, “don’t want to put you in a pop coma,” Throw Another Bear in the Canoe, January 19, 2009, Accessed October 9, 2015, https://matociquala.livejournal.com/1549883.html
56. Comments on Matociquala, “real magic,” January 14 and 15, 2009.
57. Zizi Papacharissi, “Democracy Online: Civility, Politeness, and the Democratic Potential of Online Political Discussion Groups,” New Media & Society 6, no. 2 (2004): 262.
58. Nina M. Lozano-Reich and Dana L. Cloud, “The Uncivil Tongue: Invitational Rhetoric and the Problem of Inequality,” Western Journal of Communication 73, no. 2 (2009): 223–24; Warner, Publics and Counterpublics, 119. See also Susan Herbst, Rude Democracy: Civility and Incivility in American Politics (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010).
59. Avalon’s Willow, “Why It’s Never Over – Part 2,” Seeking Avalon, January 21, 2009, http://seeking-avalon.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-its-never-over-part-2.html
60. Sparkymonster, comment on Matociquala, “don’t want to,” January 21, 2009.
61. Matociquala, “don’t want to,” January 21, 2009.
62. Matociquala, comment on “real magic,” January 21, 2009.
63. Elorie, comment on Deepa D, “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons,” January 15, 2009, https://deepad.livejournal.com/29656.html
64. Xanthalanari, comment on Deepa D, “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons”, January 16, 2009, https://deepad.livejournal.com/29656.html
65. Mark Andrejevic, “Surveillance in the Digital Enclosure,” Communication Review 10, no. 4 (2007): 301.
66. Young, Race and Popular Fantasy Literature, 177.
67. Ciderpress, comment on Deepa D, “I Didn’t Dream of Dragons”, January 15, 2009, http://archive.is/3tpUI
68. Crypto, “Cultural Appropriation,” Crypto, January 14, 2009, Accessed October 11, 2015, http://cryptoxin.livejournal.com/55680.html
69. Avalon’s Willow, “Why It’s Never Over,” Seeking Avalon, January 17, 2009, http://seeking-avalon.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-its-never-over.html
70. “FreezePage: Teresa Nielsen Hayden 1,” Accessed October 11, 2015, http://www.freezepage.com/1232982493SXILEBRINI
71. Ibid.
72. Will Shetterly, “Own your shit!,” March 2, 2009. The original blog no longer exists. However, Shetterly has the entire post in his new blog, “The Retroactive Pseudonymity of [Redacted] Coffeeandink,” Unrepentant Universalist, February 21, 2014, https://sjwar.blogspot.com/2014/02/5-retroactive-pseudonymity-of-micole.html
73. Sierra Wyndsong, “A Matter of Public Record,” Sierra Wyndsong, March 4, 2009, http://sierrawyndsong.livejournal.com/6886.html. Sierra Wyndsong is not the author’s real name; however, she argues that it is her “secondary real identity,” as it “has been my writing name online for over 15 years” and it isn’t difficult to find her. The question of “secondary real identity” or online ethos further complicates the question of real name versus pseudonym.
74. “LiveJournal,” Fanlore, Accessed December 19, 2017, https://fanlore.org/wiki/LiveJournal, para.4.
75. Thelastgoodname. “The Difference between Being Pseudonymous and Not Being Pseudonymous Online,” Thelastgoodname, March 5, 2009, Accessed October 11, 2015, http://thelastgoodname.livejournal.com/244601.html
76. Ithiliana, “In Which We Embark upon a Discussion of Speech Act Theory with Real Life Examples,” Heart of the Maze, January 26, 2009, Accessed October 11, 2015, http://ithiliana.livejournal.com/1012505.html. Ithiliana’s LiveJournal has since been deleted.
77. Humph, “In which Teresa Neilsen Hayden joins her husband in a pantsless state,” Spiralsheep, January 26, 2009, http://archive.li/tWD7j
78. Humph, comment on Humph, “In which Teresa Neilsen Hayden,” January 26, 2009.
79. Ithiliana included her legal name and the name of her doxer. However, she used only her pen name until the doxing incident, and therefore I do not further circulate her legal name. Her doxer’s name appears in this incident, and I redacted that name as a similar precautionary measure. Ithiliana, “In Which We Embark.”
80. Fuchs, “Political Economy,” 685; Andrejevic, “WikiLeaks,” 2626.
81. Earlier discussions on these topics include Russell Spears and Martin Lea, “Panacea or Panopticon? The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication,” Communication Research 21, no. 4 (1994): 427–59; James Bohman, “Expanding Dialogue: The Internet, the Public Sphere and Prospects for Transnational Democracy,” Sociological Review 52, no. s1 (2004): 131–55; Richard Kahn and Douglas Kellner, “New Media and Internet Activism: From the ‘Battle of Seattle’ to Blogging,” New Media & Society 6, no. 1 (2004): 87–95; Zizi Papacharissi, “The Virtual Sphere: The Internet as a Public Sphere,” New Media & Society 4, no. 1 (2002): 9–27.
82. Emmanuel Levinas, Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969), 198.
83. Judith Butler, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (London: Verso, 2004).
84. Livrelibre, “Failboat! The Cruise Ship of the Damned Sails On,” Like Water for Chocolate, March 3, 2009, Accessed October 11, 2015, http://livrelibre.livejournal.com/18507.html. Livrelibre’s LiveJournal has since been deleted.
85. Ciderpress, “You Mean Those Giant Brains Are Making Everyone on Earth Stupid?” Ciderpress, March 3, 2009, Accessed October 11, 2015, http://ciderpress.livejournal.com/218313.html. Ciderpress’s LiveJournal has since been deleted.
86. Troubleinchina, comment on Humph, “In which Teresa Neilsen Hayden,” January 26, 2009.
87. Violetisblue, comment on Humph, “In which Teresa Neilsen Hayden,” January 26, 2009.
88. Coffeeandink, “RaceFail: Once More, with Misdirection,” March 2, 2009, Accessed October 11, 2015, http://coffeeandink.livejournal.com/901816.html. Coffeeandink’s LiveJournal has since been deleted.
89. Georg Simmel, “The Metropolis and Mental Life,” in Simmel on Culture: Selected Writings, ed. David Patrick Frisby and Mike Featherstone (London: Sage, 1998 [1903]), 179–80.
90. Erving Goffman, Behavior in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings (New York: Free Press, 1966), 84.
91. Paul Frosh, “Phatic Morality: Television and Proper Distance,” International Journal of Cultural Studies 14, no. 4 (2011): 389.
92. Fran Tonkiss, “The Ethics of Indifference: Community and Solitude in the City,” International Journal of Cultural Studies 6, no. 3 (2003): 301.
93. Larry Gross, “The Contested Closet: The Ethics and Politics of Outing,” Critical Studies in Mass Communication 8, no. 3 (1991): 380.
94. Charles E. Morris III, “Pink Herring & the Fourth Persona: J. Edgar Hoover’s Sex Crime Panic,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 88, no. 2 (2002): 230.
95. In our Quarterly Journal of Speech essay, Cara Finnegan and I analyzed public sphere models’ “paradox” of cherishing some images while destroying others, and proposed an attention to the progression whereby an image and its meaning are “in the process of making via the hands of public agents.” Cara A. Finnegan and Jiyeon Kang, “‘Sighting’ the Public: Iconoclasm and Public Sphere Theory,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 90, no. 4 (2004): 395.
96. N.K. Jemisin, “Why I Think RaceFail Was the Bestest Thing Evah for SFF,” N.K.Jemisin (blog), January 18, 2010, http://nkjemisin.com/2010/01/why-i-think-racefail-was-the-bestest-thing-evar-for-sff
97. Ibid.
98. Nalo Hopkinson, “A Reluctant Ambassador from the Planet of Midnight,” Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts 21, no. 3 (2010): 348.
99. “Reflections on the Recent Boston Crisis,” Reddit.com, April 22, 2013, Accessed July 18, 2018, https://redditblog.com/2013/04/22/reflections-on-the-recent-boston-crisis/
100. Brianna Wu, “Doxxed: Impact of Online Threats on Women Including Private Details Being Exposed and ‘Swatting’. Plus Greg Lukianoff on Balancing Offence and Free Speech,” Index on Censorship 44, no. 3 (2015): 46–49.
101. Matt Hills, “An Extended Foreword: From Fan Doxa to Toxic Fan Practices?” Participations 15, no. 1 (2018): 118, http://www.participations.org/Volume%2015/Issue%201/contents.htm
102. Whitney Phillips, This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015), 8.