Abstract

Today’s digital diasporas, enabled by the tools of virtual communication, create a contemporary, global, open public space that enables the voices of a wide range of individuals who would otherwise be unable to express their perspectives within the diaspora. Some of those who participate in the digital diasporas might not otherwise be included in the diasporic conversation at all. The study focused on Ukrainian immigrants’ social media practices and showcases one example of how digital technologies and social media redefine traditional boundaries of communication.

Keywords

Digital Diaspora, Ukrainian Diaspora, Ukrainian Immigrants, Immigrant Online Communities, Social Media, Migration

It is now clear that the shift toward digital environments has introduced a range of new and transformed ideas and concepts impacting nearly every aspect of our lives that involves communication. This sets up the important question of the role of voice in the public sphere: the importance of diverse voices. Where do they originate from, and to whom do they belong? While one might argue that those voices come from all around the world, it’s too ambitious to try to understand the scope of the changes holistically in today’s time of continuous technological development and transformation. It’s still essential, nevertheless, to examine the emerging changes within local contexts to connect the dots and form a coherent understanding. These were the ambitions I held as a student at Brooklyn College when, in the Fall of 2022, I committed myself to an independent study of the social media practices of the Ukrainian diaspora in the United States.

The traditional notion of diaspora is rooted in the myth of the immigrant communion that is confined to the communication between people of the same culture who left their country of birth for permanent residence in a host country. With the expansion of digital technologies, particularly with the increase in social media usage, immigrants can now connect instantaneously with anyone in the world in moments. Even those who still choose to participate in online diasporic communication can connect via social media with people other than immigrants as the concept of diaspora transitioned to digital scope encompasses a larger diasporic unity that may include members who otherwise could not be considered a part of diaspora for either not being immigrants or for representing different from a given diaspora culture.

It is astounding to realize the complexity of the idea, which becomes apparent when examining the makeup of any online community. Everyone with access to the internet and a digital device in hand can now take part in a grand conversation. Digital communication and social media are redefining traditional boundaries and regulations, enabling a level of interaction that was previously unimaginable. This emerging phenomenon is especially pertinent for people who, like present-day Ukrainians, have been involuntarily dispersed across continents but remain dedicated to maintaining connections with their place of origin.

Different historical periods of turmoil and crisis contributed to the existence of the Ukrainian diaspora: the Soviet Union’s totalitarian terror and the genocide of Ukrainians in 1932-33, arrests and repressions that followed until the Soviet Union collapsed, the economic crisis of the post-Soviet Union period in the 1990s and, finally, the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This most recent wave of immigrants and refugees from Ukraine has joined the already existing Ukrainian diaspora in the US in a significantly new environment of virtual connectivity that has allowed many immigrants to stay connected with their home country while dealing with the challenges and uncertainties of living in a new country.

My objective was to research how Ukrainian immigrants process that virtuality: do they understand social media – in this case, Facebook – as a space for their diasporic communication, as a primary or alternative tool for communication with other immigrants? How do they relate to the concept of digital diaspora, and how it influences their online behaviour? As I aimed to analyze the role of social media in Ukrainian digital communion, one of my research goals was to understand the extent to which immigrants use social media for diasporic connections. I also investigated the factors motivating members to participate in the immigrant ethnic Facebook public groups. 

The case study was conducted in two phases. The first phase encompassed digital ethnographic observation. I focused on the content of posts that were shared in the three largest public groups of Ukrainian immigrants in the USA on Facebook as of October 2022. The first group, “Ukrainian Diaspora in the USA” had 35 thousand members at the beginning of the ethnographic observation and 35.4 thousand at the end. The second group, “Ukrainian American Community” had 5.9 thousand members at the beginning and 6.5 thousand at the end of the observation period. Finally, the third group, “Ukrainian Immigrant”, had 12.4 thousand members at the beginning and 12.5 thousand at the end. Throughout the observation, which lasted from October 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022, a total of 1777 posts were created and shared. I excluded those requesting help from a “sponsor” that was needed to get travel authorization to the US under the “U4U” program approved. The program allowed the resettlement to the US of 100,000 Ukrainian refugees, and the process of obtaining travel authorization required an official attestation by an American citizen or a permanent resident to financially support a Ukrainian refugee implying that the sponsor would be responsible for the refugee’s wellbeing. The program was named “Uniting for Ukraine” and abbreviated as “U4U”.

Still, my study was conducted in October-November 2022, during one of the most intense phases of the war. Thus, the prevailing number of posts in Ukrainian immigrant public groups on Facebook were related to the war in Ukraine. This included the Ukrainian news, analysis and opinions on the war, fundraising and donations to help the Ukrainian people and the army, and war-related memes. The content about the war once again demonstrated the members of the digital diaspora’s strong connection to their home country.

The second phase of the research was the anonymous cross-sectional survey. The analysis of the survey revealed that a significant number of posts were made by Ukrainian users located outside of the United States. Some were in European countries, where they shared cultural content such as folk songs and excerpts from Ukrainian literature or initiated fundraisers to support war-affected individuals. Meanwhile, others promoted their businesses located in Ukraine to extend their reach beyond the country. The outcomes of the second phase of my study confirmed that almost twenty percent of the Facebook groups’ members were not immigrants, either currently or ever.

At this point, it became apparent that my initial goal of defining the digital diaspora with the help of the data collected from the perspective of the diaspora itself would not be achieved without considering the concept’s ambiguity due to its hybrid nature. Although my study did not focus on the essence of the phenomenon but rather on the digital practices of a sample diaspora, its results brought attention to the question of what the idea of digital diaspora should encompass. This is because it involves not only the digital dimensions but also elements of imagined communities that are not traditionally considered part of the diaspora. This may even contradict the meaning of the term: should individuals who have never left their home countries also be considered part of the digital diaspora?

My research then went further to examine digital communities and digital diaspora as examples of ideas that digital technologies have transformed and which, because of that change, have been discussed by scholars in communication and media studies. In addition to this, I utilized the theories of de-territorialized and imagined communities, the social capital theory, and the theory of social media as hybrid communication spaces. Despite the growing body of literature on the subject, I observed that there was still debate surrounding the nature of diasporic online interactions which encouraged me to question for the first time whether digital diaspora is a form of diasporic community that is enhanced by digital technologies, which enable its members to connect online as an alternative to traditional face-to-face interactions, or whether it is a distinct entity that possesses a different essence when compared to the traditional understanding of diaspora – wherein people living outside of their native land connect based on their cultural and ethnic similarities while residing in their host country. In this sense, the digital diaspora is a community of immigrants that interacts using digital technologies. 

When considering the usage of digital technologies and the Internet for social connections in conjunction with the nature of the diaspora as groups of people dispersed from their homeland who share their everyday experiences both physically and virtually, the concept becomes more complex. Digital diaspora communities are no longer just groups of immigrants who maintain emotional connections to their collective cultural heritage. This new virtuality offers ways and tools for establishing a contemporary inclusive public space which allows broader engagement in global communication. It enables individuals from diverse locations to express their perspectives and, despite the physical migration, virtually keep their roots at the place where they belong, which is valuable in a time of economic turmoil, environmental changes and conflicts the world is currently undergoing.