Synthetic Social Media: Studying Platform-Embedded AI

Social media platforms are increasingly shaped by the integration of generative AI alongside long-standing analytical and predictive models. Today’s algorithmic systems are moving from the background infrastructure to the forefront of digital social life – intervening in the content feeds as conversational agents like xAI’s Grok, reshaping identity through synthetic likenesses of OpenAI’s Sora-2, and expanding the social ecosystem itself through projects like Butterflies AI and Moltbook, where autonomous AI agents operate in coexistence with (or independently of) human users. As these developments rapidly outpace existing research frameworks, the need for mixed critical methodologies grows more urgent. 

Synthetic social media research takes as its starting point the recognition that platforms shaped by generative AI are not simply data-processing systems but cultural environments organized through algorithms, interfaces, and shared ways of feeling and knowing. Analytically, the attribute “synthetic” implies more than artificial arrangements of collective agency. Rather than treating AI as a radical rupture, it situates generative systems within broader arrangements of human-machine co-creation that amplify specific imaginaries, values, and concerns. Methodologically, it foregrounds ambiguities in how AI platforms recalibrate meaning and how users develop a practical “feel” for algorithmic systems while negotiating their constraints.

Critical digital methods have responded to these developments by treating chatbots and generative systems as part of the research design as well as objects of inquiry in their own right. Synthetic text, images, and sounds are no longer exceptional artifacts but common platform vernaculars, sustained by entangled practices of prompting, remixing, and circulation. Within platform studies, interface methods, visual digital methods, and emerging forms of synthetic ethnography, AI systems have been repurposed for formatting, summarization, annotation, labeling, and the generation of synthetic data, while being interrogated for how they shape knowledge production. This work has foregrounded questions of method: Are we merely studying AI slop, distracted by the automated excess of content stripped of context and meaning, or are we witnessing the redefinition of social media itself along with its affordances and cultures of use?

The 2026 Autumn School edition of the CRC “Media of Cooperation” tackles this question by focusing on generative AI as an infrastructural, cultural, and regulated component of social media platforms across three intersecting dimensions: At the cultural level of everyday use, it refers to the routinized practices of prompting or interacting with platform-embedded generative systems through multimodal inputs. Infrastructurally, it signals a shift in agency, as platforms keep multiplying affordances that nudge us into co-producing synthetic outputs. Finally, it foregrounds research techniques for probing AI models in their entanglements with the platform governance and moderation regimes. 

Against this background, we invite participants to submit short contributions inspired by, though not limited to, one of the following „how to“ prompts: 

• How to repurpose AI personas as research personas 
• How to rethink walkthrough methods in light of platforms’ generative affordances 
• How to approach cultural biases conditioned by AI systems and prompt cultures
• How to study AI moderation as platform policy in action
• How to explore platform agency and its steering ideologies 
• How to integrate screenshots as a method for capturing synthetic situations 
• How to account for the ambiguities emerging from human-machine co-creation
• How to develop non-extractive approaches to researching AI platforms

Participants are invited to submit a short abstract (maximum 500 words excluding references) outlining how their work relates to the event’s theme. Presentations should raise questions or provocations rather than present finished research. Accepted abstracts will be grouped into thematic sessions and discussed in a collaborative, dialogue-focused format.

Submit your proposal by 30. April 2026
Notification of acceptance by 15 May 2026
Registration by 15 June 2026

The event opens with a one-day conference and moves into hands-on workshops and project work. Accepted abstracts will be grouped into thematic sessions curated by the organising team. Presenters will be connected via email ahead of time to coordinate their contributions. The first day is about presentations and discussions. The next three days are dedicated to exploring and developing methods – hands-on! We invite you to join a team of interdisciplinary scholars and data designers in probing new methodological combinations. Each of our project teams will present a research question alongside a specific method to be collaboratively explored. Please bring your laptops. The project titles will be announced soon. The event is free of charge, though attendees are responsible for arranging and covering their travel and accommodation in Siegen.

→ Apply here 

Was haben Medien mit Extraktivismus zu tun? Welche ökologischen Katastrophen und sozialen Verwerfungen verursacht Extraktivismus? Und was können wir gegen die Ausbeutung ganzer Regionen für Medientechnologien tun? Diesen Fragen widmeten sich über 100 Teilnehmende auf der Spring School Medien:Extraktivismus vom 17.–19.4. 2026 in Bochum.

Im Rahmen der diesjährigen Spring School haben Studierende, Zivilgesellschaft und Wissenschaftler:innen über zweieinhalb Tage gemeinsam gearbeitet und Konflikte rund um das Thema Extraktivismus mithilfe kreativer Methoden wie Waterscaping, Collagen und Mapping erforscht. Neben lokalen Extraktionsorten und Geschichten des Ruhrgebietes wurden in diesem Jahr internationale Extraktionsregionen– und praktiken „über und unter Tage“ thematisiert. Verstanden als System der Ausbeutung, lässt Extraktivismus der Erde keine Reproduktionsmöglichkeiten und bringt soziale Verwerfungen und Konflikte bis hin zu Menschenrechtsverletzungen mit sich. Extraktivismus ist einer der größten Umgestalter der Erde durch Minen, aber auch durch extraktive Infrastrukturen. Extraktivismus ist zudem wesentlich für die Klimakatastrophe verantwortlich. Ein Fokus lag dabei auf den Entwicklungen im Bereich künstlichen Intelligenz, die in Zukunft die  Extraktionsfolgen massiv verschärfen werden.

Extraktivismus und KI

In den Beiträgen der internationalen Gäste ging es um fossile Brennstoffe, die das Ruhrgebiet noch heute prägen – aber auch um Mineralien und Erden für digitale Technologien. Neben seltenen Erden für Batterien, Chips und Co. standen auch Infrastrukturen für KI, etwa Datenzentren, im kritischen Fokus. Durch die Implementierung von KI-Bots sowie geopolitische Konflikte weltweit ist KI nicht nur gesellschaftlich, sondern auch ökologisch ein drängendes Thema. Der enorme Verbrauch von Wasser und Energie jener Datenzentren, die die Grundlage Künstlicher Intelligenz bilden, sowie die   umkämpften Mineralien, die zur Herstellung der benötigten Rechenchips notwenig sind, machen KI zu einem der am schnellsten wachsenden Ressourcenverbraucher weltweit.  Vortragende und Teilnehmende haben sowohl die Perspektive des globalen Extraktivismus als auch die lokalen Auwirkungen solcher Tech-Infrastruktren kritisch diskutiert. Datencenter, die massiv in den Wasserverbrauch eingreifen, sogenannte Click-Work-Arbeitszentren, in denen Content-Moderation, Data Labeling und andere niedrig bezahlten Tätigkeiten ausgeführt werden, werden oftmals in den Globalen Süden ausgelagert, sind aber auch in Deutschland und im Ruhrgebiet zu finden. Weltweit tragen sie zu den extraktiven Strukturen vor Ort bei. Postkoloniale und feministische Perspektiven auf Mining, Arbeit, Ressourcen und Sacrifice Zones sind daher unerlässliche Perspektive auf das Thema Extraktivismus durch KI Infrastruktur. 

Durch diese weitgefasste Perspektive auf die Praktiken des Extraktivismus konnten die vielen gesellschaftlichen Bereiche, die von den Folgen des Extartkvismus betroffen sind, in den Workshops miteinander verbunden werden. Die Medienwissenschaft wird durch diese klimagerecht und extraktivismuskritische Perspektive zudem auf ihre materiellen Grundlagen im Sinne der Mediengeologie des Theoretikers Jussi Parikkas zurückgeworfen (siehe auch Noam Gramlich Arbeiten hierzu). 

Das Programm

Den ersten Abend eröffneten eine Einführung in das Thema Extraktivismus und Medien sowie drei Keynotes und eine Podiumsdiskussion zu den Themen Revier Noir von Frederike Lange aus dem Deutschen Bergbaumuseum, Queerness im historischen Bergbau zwischen Ruhrgebiet und Oberschlesien der Bochumer Künstlerin Julia Nitzschke sowie zu Luft und Extraktivismus der Kulturwissenschaftlerin und Filmemacherin Marietta Kesting. In der anschließenden Podiumsdiskussion mit den Beitragenden, die der Medienwissenschaftler Oliver Leistert  moderierte, wurde der Fokus auf die Schäden gerichtet, die etwa Datenzentren verursachen, und darauf, wie sich lokale Bevölkerungen z.B. in den USA schon heute gegen diese wehren. 

Am zweiten Tag ging es hands on weiter mit praktischen Workshops zur Emscher von Natalie Pielok, zu Film und Klimakatastrophe von Matthias Grotkopp und Maike Reinerth, zu Waterscaping von Rémi Willemin und Alisa Kronberger und zu Infrastrukturen des Extraktivismus mit Petra Löffler, Marlene Helling und Jakob Claus. Deutlich wurde in vielen Beiträgen, dass Extraktivismus Ewigkeitskosten mit sich bringt, die auch im Ruhrgebiet immer noch aufwändige Lösungen erfordern, wie etwa die Entsorgung toxischer Förderreste oder das auf Dauer angelegte Abpumpen von Wasser aus ehemaligen Steinkohlegruben. 

Neben wissenschaftlichen Inputs standen auch künstlerische Auseinandersetzungen im Zentrum, etwa in der Lecture Performance von Azadeh Ganjeh zu Goldextraktivimus und den damit verbundenen sozialen Konflikten sowie politischen (Online-)Protesten im Iran. Eine Fotoausstellung in der Quartiershalle von Sara Bahadori sensibilisierte die Teilnehmenden für Ausschlüsse und Marginalisierungen innerhalb der Klimabewegung. In einem Workshop zum weißen Blick auf das Klima wurde das Thema von der Referentin nochmals kritisch und reflexiv vertieft. 

Eindrücke der Spring School

Rund 100 Teilnehmende haben aktiv an Workshops zu Wasser, KI und Bergbaugeschichte sowie an einem dekolonialen Stadtrundgang in Bochum – geleitet von Marie Sprenger und Florian Trompke – teilgenommen.   Abschließend  entwickelten Lehrende und Studierende in einem Workshop zu klimagerechter Lehre am Sonntagmorgen Inhalte und Methoden für ein zukünftiges hochschulübergreifendes Curriculum zum Thema.

Die Spring School ist eine Veranstaltung des Projekts „Öffentlichkeit“ im SFB Medien der Kooperation und stellt eine Öffentlichkeit aus Künstler:innen, Wissenschaftler:innen und Journalist:innen sowie engagierter Zivilgesellschaft rund um das Konfliktthema Klimakatastrophe her. 

Die dritte Spring School des Arbeitskreises MediaClimateJustice wurde organisiert von Julia Bee, Gerko Egert, Alisa Kronberger und Julia Reinermann und wurde unter anderem durch die Förderung des SFB Medien der Kooperation und der Ruhr-Universität Bochum realisiert. Ziel der Spring Schools zu Medien und Klima ist das Thema Klima stärker in der Medienwissenschaft und der Gesellschaft zu verankern. 

The two-day online conference and data sprint “Witnessing and Justice in Data-Based Research” took place on 31 March and 1 April 2026, bringing together scholars, archivists, journalists and civil society actors, among them war crime documentors and OSINT communities. Organised as part of an ongoing collaboration between the “War Sensing” project (European University Viadrina/CRC “Media of Cooperation”), the Telegram Archive of the War (Center for Urban History, Lviv), and the School of Communications/Conflict Institute (Dublin City University), the event reflected upon the practices and limits of war-related research based on digital, archived and other types of data.

The urgent question at the center of the event was how to address the ongoing tension between data-based research of war and the injustices that persist. Despite the large volume of data documenting Russia’s war in Ukraine, the destruction and attacks against Ukraine continue. Despite the limits of research, OSINT, investigative journalism, and other interventions, data-based investigations using “data for the good” (cf. Williams, 2022; Kazansky et al., 2019) can form a small part of achieving transitional justice and maintain hope and demand accountability by using digitally derived evidence of war injustices and crimes.

DAY 1, 31.03.2026

Lessons from an emergency archive: Telegram Archive of the War 

The conference was opened on the morning of 31 March with a public keynote lecture by Oksana Avramenko (Center for Urban History, Lviv), moderated by Prof. Dr. Tanya Lokot (Dublin City University). Titled “Granting Access to War: Ethics and Accountability in the TG Archive”, Avramenko’s talk addressed the ethical implications of making Telegram data in the war context accessible for research through the Telegram Archive of the War (TG Archive) while safeguarding sensitive personal data of civilian war witnesses.

A central concern was the extensive scope of personal data involved: the archive currently holds approximately two million user IDs, necessitating a tiered classification system that distinguishes between moderately sensitive, sensitive, and highly sensitive content. This framework reflects the serious responsibility the Archive carries toward the civilians whose data has been preserved. Oksana Avramenko also drew attention to findings from CRESE research, which indicate that Telegram-sourced material has been used in only 0.002% of cases before the International Criminal Court, raising important questions about the gap between the volume of documentation being preserved and its current utility in formal accountability processes. Insights during the discussion addressed what the team of the TG Archive would have done differently if the circumstances had allowed: Due to wartime and platform-based conditions, the Archive could not meet the conventional standard of informed consent, such as contacting channel administrators before archiving their content. Oksana Avramenko framed this as a fundamental tension between the imperative to preserve a historic record and the lived reality of those still experiencing the war being documented. 

Imaginations of War Witnessing

The keynote was followed by the roundtable “Limits of War Witnessing”, moderated by Prof. Dr. Miglė Bareikytė (European University Viadrina). During the talk, five practitioners working across investigative and data journalism, film and memory studies – Jelnar Ahmad (Syrian Archive Programme Manager at Mnemonic), Karina Buhaichenko (investigative journalist at Slidstvo.info), Yevheniia Drozdova (data journalist at Texty.org.ua), Oleksiy Radynski (filmmaker and co-founder of Kinotron Group), and Bohdan Shumylovych (Associate professor at Ukrainian Catholic University, Lviv) – discussed the experiential and political limitations of digital war witnessing contributors.

Jelnar Ahmad, representing the Syrian Archive, emphasized the complementary nature of digital documentation, where each collected source represents only a piece of the larger puzzle, raising questions about whether all perspectives are captured, and what consent means in contexts where safety concerns, such as the need to withhold geocoordinates, preclude direct engagement with witnesses. Karina Buhaichenko from the investigative outlet Slidstvo.info drew attention to the politics of visibility, arguing that systematic violence is often the least visible, and explored the tensions between documenting and protecting, as well as between maintaining public attention and the moral exhaustion that comes when witnessing becomes routine. Yevheniia Drozdova from Texty.org.ua noted that despite this being one of the best-documented wars in history, justice has not followed, in part because data journalism operates in a severely constrained environment where security considerations keep many registers closed. She advocated for publishing findings based on transparent estimation instead of silence and called for greater collaboration between organisations whose work or topics frequently overlap. Oleksiy Radynski (co-founder of Kinotron Group), spoke about working with the same body of data as his fellow contributors but repurposing it to research nuclear terror and occupation by making sense of thousands of hours of CCTV footage. He argued that unedited, uninterrupted raw material best exposes what he called “the everyday banality of the Russian war machine”, and that filmmaking in this context becomes an innovative form of resistance. Bohdan Shumylovych (Ukrainian Catholic University) presented a non-conventional approach to war documentation through the collection of dreams, drawing on the concept of “egodocuments” to argue that personal narratives are intimately connected to time, temporality, and social tension; he also reflected on the possibilities and dangers of feeding such material into AI systems, where lived experience risks becoming sensationalized.

The subsequent discussion explored the productive opacity of certain documentation practices, such as deliberate choices about safety and not fully disclosing collected material, the cross-contextual connections between the Syrian and Ukrainian cases, and the question of timeliness, when investigations can generate public discussion even if structural change remains slow. Participants also reflected on the different scales of public engagement and the role citizens play as active participants in the larger witnessing process.

Researching War through Telegram Data: Summary of the data sprint 

The first conference day concluded with a half-day data sprint in the afternoon of 31 March, during which participants from the previous data sprint „War Sensing Through The Telegram Archive of The War“ in September 2025 discussed their ongoing engagement with the Telegram Archive’s data. 

The data sprint session revisited key questions appearing since the last data sprint, including the outcomes and continuation of the research collaborations, their future plans, the role of the Telegram Archive of the War, and the related ethical and practical challenges encountered during the research process. Facilitated by Johanna Hiebl (European University Viadrina) and Oksana Avramenko (Center for Urban History, Lviv), the session featured presentations by three groups. 

Group 1 (Trustworthiness of OSI(NT) Outputs) 

Group 1 centred on the challenge of distinguishing between different types of open-source intelligence outputs, namely OSINT, OSINV, OSINF, and Grey OSINT and how they appear specifically in the context of Telegram as a platform and the TG Archive as a research resource. 

A key conceptual move in this group project was reframing OSINT as a process rather than a product or entity, which complicated the classification of Telegram posts such as satire or purely descriptive posts, and foregrounded the importance of localised, contextual knowledge during the ongoing war. Military slang such as „mangal”, which is a term used for a  makeshift protective structure fitted to tanks (as well as a portable grill), illustrate how much understanding can hinge on terms that are invisible to keyword-based search. Here the group throughout their research process noted that not everyone possesses the linguistic and contextual competencies required to conduct, but also assess OSINT content responsibly. As a side project, the project group started mapping the OSINT landscape and its community vernacular on Telegram to address the persistent challenge of contextual knowledge during war. 

The group also grappled with the platform’s technical specificities within their own research process, including the distinction between archived comments, the differentiation between public channels and private chats and the need for desktop access to be able to fully evaluate a message. A recurring theme was the insufficiency of open-source digitally derived evidence isolated from Telegram, highlighting the need for cross-referencing and corroboration with other sources. Looking ahead, the group is working towards a renewed version of the Amsterdam Matrix for classifying OSINT outputs with a focus on Telegram during Russia’s war against Ukraine. There are also ideas to integrate the new framework into the TG Archive interface to guide future users in assessing the trustworthiness of OSI(NT) outputs. 

Group 2 (Sabotage on Telegram) 

Group 2 analysed Telegram practices of grassroots sabotage groups in Russia’s war against Ukraine, choosing to focus on the concept of sabotage as resistance in the context of the war. They explore the representation and practices of sabotage actors through digital ethnographic data collection and qualitative content analysis of three pre-selected channels across two stages: the initial phase following the full-scale invasion (after 24.02.2022) and the established phase (after the liberation of Kherson). Using Google Sheets, the group documented their observation by recording only interpretations and selected phrases from TG Archive data, to minimise and essentially avoid sensitive data sharing with third party platforms, which forms the core of a collaborative paper. They require continuous access to the TG Archive and plan to present results at international conferences.  

Key challenges included the archive’s data limits (only until June 2023), leading the group to focus on early group establishment and key dates in the early stages of the war. Ethical constraints on exporting data were addressed through rich-text coding while avoiding sensitive details. The limits of the translation tool that is embedded in the TG Archive and does not share the data with third party platforms were mitigated via double and triple coding, discussing metaphorical language (e.g., „going for a walk“ as a form of resistance/protest), and regular exchange meetings.

As the war is ongoing, the group anonymizes channel and group titles to avoid harming participants in occupied Ukrainian territories and in Russia involved in partisan activities. To prevent adversarial learning, for example through making strategic information on sabotage organization potentially available to Russian security services, the project team chose to describe groups in an abstract manner and their practices in general terms. Central questions in this research project included how sabotage actors describe their own actions, and the issue of research extractivism if/when getting in contact with investigated groups. Currently, the group is finalising their literature review and structuring analysis results.

Group 3 (Everyday War Witnessing: Witnessing the Outbreak of the War through Urban Chats) 

Group 3 examined how the outbreak of the full-scale invasion became witnessable through Telegram, focusing on urban chats from 24 February 2022. The group employs a methodology combining distant reading, by focusing on words that appear most common with close reading of the context for topic identification, followed by merging selected quotes and visualising them through colour-coded topics. The current aim of this research group is to test this methodology—checking for important missing elements—and to visualise topics of each chat separately.

Using the TG Archive as the data source for the project, messages, publication times, and chat names were collected from the archive and used for collaborative analysis, such as Google Collaboratory. Challenges include the subjectivity of defining topics, and decisions about visualisation methods. A data-related question the group faces is whether chat names should be published in the final work.

Outlook and Future for Working with the TG Archive

The data sprint session concluded with an outlook about future steps for working with the TG Archive. A central topic was developing clear citation guidelines, such as mentioning the Archive name, message ID, channel/chat ID, timestamp and guidelines on how to seed the archive, the ethical handling of anonymised data, and proper visualisation practices. Questions regarding the further development of the TG Archive revolved around quotes creation and management for collaborative work with CSV export and assigned tags, as well as the creation of a thematic collections registry on the website of the TG Archive that follows a transparent categorisation logic. 

Open ethical challenges addressed the technical feasibility of obtaining consent from channel administrators or participants due to the scale and urgency of data collection. Debates of the group discussion centered on obtaining consent after the fact, such as contacting channel administrators, which is potentially dependent on channel status following the “situational ethics” approach as advocated by the Association of Internet Researchers. Moreover, the usage of third party services, including LLMs, presents another ethical tension, as the current user agreement prohibits the usage of such services, although local models that don’t share data might be ethically feasible. Additional questions included best practices for user agreements to mitigate data breaches and further consultation with other civil archiving initiatives such as the Syrian Archive. 

DAY 2, 01.04.2026

Justice through Digital Data

The second day started off with a public session in the afternoon of 1 April, beginning with the roundtable “Digital Justice and Accountability”, moderated by Johanna Hiebl (European University Viadrina). The roundtable started off with practitioner perspectives of Jenna Dolecek (OSINT for Ukraine) and Maryna Slobodyanuk (Truth Hounds), both of whom are involved in documenting and investigating war crimes during the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Their presentations were followed by Kaja Kowalczewska (Digital Justice Center, University of Wrocław/Queen’s University Belfast) who researches the role of civil society organisations in accountability processes, in particular on how digital data collected by CSOs can be responsibly transferred into prosecutorial and investigative contexts. 

Jenna Dolecek spoke from the perspective of rapid-response verification, noting that physical investigators typically arrive only after an attack has taken place, which means that digital evidence often precedes and shapes what is later examined on the ground. Yet despite this, none of the cases she presented have so far appeared in court. Rather than framing this as a failure, she approached it as a shared learning process across the field. Maryna Slobodyanuk observed that while the war is in many ways being recorded automatically, a significant gap persists between documentation and justice: the evidentiary requirements of court proceedings are stringent, the Ukrainian legal system is still adapting to the realities of digital evidence, and the data itself remains fragile and fragmented. She also flagged the ethical risks of relying on data derived from hacked or otherwise non-public sources as legal evidence, as well as the persistent practical challenge of accessing war crime scenes. Kaja Kowalczewska brought in a research perspective, arguing that digitalisation has prompted a democratisation of accountability processes by granting access to non-state actors who lack the institutional knowledge and resources of traditional investigative bodies. She emphasised that the key measure of success is not the volume of material collected, but whether the system as a whole can responsibly navigate that material into prosecutorial contexts. 

In the subsequent discussion, Kowalczewska stressed “the importance of coordination more than lack of civil journalism/data,” highlighting success stories of coordination architecture. The conversation also addressed the challenges of fake materials requiring extensive verification time, with AI framed not as black and white but as a tool supporting active human analysis. Questions from the audience raised the role that local communities can and should play in data-based investigations, pointing to an ongoing tension of visibility between centralised expertise and grassroots knowledge.

Capturing Cultural Resistance as Less Documented War Witnessing

The public conference programme concluded with a film screening of “A Home for Rita” (directed by Yulia Appen, 2025). The documentary film follows a Roma family that had to flee the Russian occupation in spring 2022, focusing in particular on the direct experiences of Roma women during the war, their stories and their playful imagination. Set in the city of Zaporizhzhia, just 40 kilometres from the frontline, the narrative centers around the housing problem for displaced Roma people, and their search for a home and a sense of belonging. At the same time, the movie documents the reflections of the Roma people on Ukraine and their own complex identity during the full-scale invasion and in the context of the resistance to Russian aggression.

The screening was followed by a Q&A with director Yulia Appen and Sashko Protyah from Freefilmers, moderated by Prof. Dr. Miglė Bareikytė. The director Appen answered questions from the audience, describing the process of establishing contact with the Roma families, as well as the ethical implications of her position as an external individual producing a documentary film about a marginalized community, her approach of continuously giving back to the community and especially supporting the family in relocating. 

A word of thanks from the organizers

The format of the online conference and data sprint around the Telegram Archive of the War once again provided a space to carry out hands-on data research and to discuss the intersection of different methodological approaches and ethical challenges, drawing on specific thematic and temporal contexts. Beyond the specific findings of each working group and roundtable contribution, this year’s programme highlighted the tension between the extensive documentation of the war, digital data-based witnessing and ongoing injustices through the ongoing attack on Ukraine. Participants emphasized that open-source digitally derived evidence from the TG Archive cannot stand alone, but requires cross-referencing and also effective coordination and collaboration efforts to ensure that those involved do not duplicate their work. In times of ongoing war in Ukraine and thus in Europe, where Russia’s continued bombardment makes travel to and from Ukraine — and thus collaborative research in a shared physical space — extremely difficult, this online format has proven a meaningful way to sustain research engagement with issues that are urgent for participants from both academia and different realms of practice. As organisers, we want to thank everyone who joined this year’s conference and data sprint for their continued collaboration, openness, and mutual support.

On behalf of the CRC Media of Cooperation and the project teams “War Sensing” (European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder) with Prof. Dr. Miglė Bareikytė, Johanna Hiebl and Gregor Wörl, the Telegram Archive of the War (Center for Urban History, Lviv) with Oksana Avramenko and Maryana Mazurak and School of Communications/Conflict Institute (Dublin City University) with Prof. Dr. Tanya Lokot

Über das Mercator Fellowship am SFB 1187

Um die wissenschaftliche Zusammenarbeit im Forschungsverbund zu stärken, vergibt der SFB 1187 Mercator Fellowships an herausragende Wissenschaftler*innen aus dem In- und Ausland. Mercator Fellows forschen für eine längere Zeit und enger Zusammenarbeit mit einem oder mehreren der am SFB 1187 beteiligten Teilprojekte zu Fragestellungen rund um digitaler, datenintensiver Medien. Zusammen mit den regulären Mitglieder verfolgen unsere Mercator Fellows das gemeinsame Ziel, interdisziplinäre Ansätze weiterzuentwickeln und das Forschungsprogramm des SFB mitzugestalten. Die Aufnahme dieser renommierten Forschenden stärkt nicht nur das internationale Netzwerk des SFB 1187, sondern fördert auch den Wissens- und Ideentransfer, der für die digitale Gegenwartsforschung am SFB von zentraler Bedeutung ist.

Das Mercator Fellowship ist ein Modul im Rahmen der Förderprogramme der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft und dient dazu, einen intensiven und langfristigen Forschungsaustausch zu ermöglichen.

Über die aktuellen Mercator Fellows

Dr. phil. Azadeh Ganjeh

Professur für Performative Künste im Sozialen

Hochschule für Künste im Sozialen, Ottersberg

Dr. Olga Gorinuova

Professor of Media Arts

Royal Holloway, University of London.

Prof.‘in Dr. Maija Hirvonen

Professor for German language, culture and translation

Faculty of Information Technology and Communication Sciences | Language Studies | German

Tampere University, Finland

Prof. Dr. Jürgen Streeck

Department of Communication Studies, Moody College of Communication
University of Texas at Austin, USA

Prof. Dr. Christopher Salter

University Research Chair in New Media, Technology and the Senses

University Montreal

2 Kurzzeit-Promotionsstipendien am SFB zu vergeben

Der SFB vergibt wieder zwei Kurzzeitstipendien an Doktorand*innen, die im Bereich digitaler Medien, Sensing und Sensorik, Datenpraktiken und KI forschen und Interesse an einer längerfristigen Zusammenarbeit mit dem SFB haben.

→ Zur Ausschreibung

Kurzinformationen

• Stipendienbeginn: 1. Oktober 2026
• Laufzeit: 9-12 Monate
• Grundbetrag des Stipendiums: 1.650,- EUR (Höchstsatz der DFG)
• Sachkostenzuschuss (103,- EUR)und ggf. Kinderzulage werden zusätzlich gezahlt
• Bitte beachten Sie die DFG-Richtlinien für Promotionsstipendien, die eine Kombination des Stipendiums mit weiterer Erwerbstätigkeit nur in engen Grenzen erlauben. Die Förderung kann nur mit einer wissenschaftlichen Nebentätigkeit bis zu einer Grenze von max. 6.000,- EUR im Jahr aufgestockt werden. Darüber hinausgehende Einnahmen werden ggf. vom Stipendienbetrag abgezogen.

Über den SFB 1187 „Medien der Kooperation“

Der SFB ist ein interdisziplinärer Forschungsverbund, bestehend aus 19 Teilprojekten und mehr als 60 Wissenschaftler*innen aus Medienwissenschaft, Ethnologie, Soziologie, Informatik, Linguistik, Ubiquitous Computing, Science and Technology Studies, Erziehungs-, Rechts- und Ingenieurswissenschaften.

Der SFB wird seit 2016 von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) gefördert. Im Zentrum der Forschung steht die Entstehung, Gestaltung und Nutzung digitaler, datenintensiver Medien, die der SFB als kooperativ erarbeitete Kooperationsbedingungen versteht. In der ersten Förderphase (2016-2019) reagierte der SFB auf die Relevanz von sozialen Medien und Plattformen, in der zweiten Phase (2020-2023) standen datenintensive Medien und Datenpraktiken im Mittelpunkt. Die aktuelle dritte Phase (2024-2027) widmet sich dem Zusammenspiel von Sensormedien und Künstlicher Intelligenz.
Über das Kurzstipendienprogramm des SFB erhalten nationale und internationale Doktorand*innen die Möglichkeit, ihr Forschungsprojekt im SFB weiterzuentwickeln, beteiligte Forscher*innen der Teilprojekte kennenzulernen und sich mit diesen auszutauschen. Thematisch sollen die Forschungsprojekte der Stipendiat*innen im Umfeld der Teilprojekte des SFB angelegt sein, damit ihre Arbeit von den Projekten unterstützt werden kann. Organisatorisch sind die Stipendiat*innen dem integrierten Graduiertenkolleg (MGK) des SFB zugeordnet und profitieren von seinem strukturierten Qualifizierungskonzept. Der SFB bietet Stipendiat*innen ein internationales Umfeld für interdisziplinäre Medienforschung sowie ein umfassendes Veranstaltungsprogramm und Methodentraining u.a. im Bereich ethnografischer, digitaler, sensorbasierter, linguistischer sowie KI-basierter Methoden.

Nähere Informationen zu den Schwerpunkten und Teilbereichen des SFB finden Sie unter: https://www.mediacoop.uni-siegen.de.

Ihr Profil

• Einschlägiger, überdurchschnittlicher Studienabschluss in einer der am SFB beteiligten oder verwandten Disziplinen, bevorzugt in der Medien- und Kulturwissenschaft, Soziologie oder im Bereich der Sozio- oder Wirtschaftsinformatik, Human-Computer-Interaction oder Informationssysteme (Master, Magister, Diplom oder Lehramt/Staatsexamen Sek. II)
• Eigenes Forschungsvorhaben in einer der o.g. Disziplinen im Themenbereich des SFB. Idealerweise können Sie das Projekt einem der Teilbereiche des SFB – Infrastrukturen, Öffentlichkeiten oder Praxeologie – zuordnen
• Interesse an Methoden der Medienforschung, der Analyse von Datenpraktiken sowie Affinität zu interdisziplinären Arbeitsweisen
• Bereitschaft sich am internationalen Veranstaltungsprogramm des SFB und des MGK zu beteiligen
• Sehr gute englische Sprachkenntnisse in Wort und Schrift

Ihre Aufgaben

Erwartet werden:

• Regelmäßige Teilnahme und inhaltliche Mitwirkung am Veranstaltungs- und Qualifizierungsprogramm des MGK (Kolloquien, Workshops, Summer Schools, Methodenwerkstätten, interdisziplinäre Kleingruppen)
• Präsentation von Zwischenergebnissen des Forschungsvorhabens innerhalb des MGK-Kolloquiums

Zur Bewerbung

Ihre Bewerbungsunterlagen (Motivationsschreiben, Lebenslauf, Zeugniskopien, 5-10 seitige Skizze einer Projektidee) senden Sie bitte bis zum 19. Juni 2026 zusammengefasst in einer PDF-Datei (max. 5 MB) per E-Mail an dominik.schrey@uni-siegen.de. Bitte beachten Sie, dass Gefährdungen der Vertraulichkeit und der unbefugte Zugriff Dritter bei einer Kommunikation per unverschlüsselter E-Mail nicht ausgeschlossen werden können. Informationen über die Universität Siegen finden Sie auf unserer Homepage www.uni-siegen.de.

Über die Universität Siegen

Die Universität Siegen ist eine interdisziplinär ausgerichtete und weltoffene Universität mit aktuell rund 18.000 Studierenden und einem Fächerspektrum von den Geistes-, Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften bis hin zu Natur-, Ingenieur- und Lebenswissenschaften. Mit über 2.000 Beschäftigten zählen wir zu den größten Arbeitgebern der Region und bieten ein einzigartiges Umfeld für Lehre, Forschung und Weiterbildung.

Chancengerechtigkeit und Diversity werden an der Universität Siegen gefördert und gelebt. Bewerbungen von Frauen sind uns ausdrücklich willkommen und werden gemäß Landesgleichstellungsgesetz besonders berücksichtigt. Gleichermaßen wünschen wir uns Bewerbungen von Personen mit unterschiedlichstem persönlichen, sozialen und kulturellen Hintergrund, Menschen mit Schwerbehinderung und diesen Gleichgestellten.

Informationen über die Universität Siegen finden Sie auf unserer Homepage www.uni-siegen.de.

Kontakt

Dr. Dominik Schrey
Tel.: +49(0) 271 740-4664
E-Mail: dominik.schrey[ae]uni-siegen.de

Über die Working Paper Reihe

Die Working Paper Series des SFB 1187 „Medien der Kooperation“ versammelt aktuelle Beiträge aus dem Umfeld der inter- und transdisziplinären Medienforschung. Die SFB Working Paper Series bietet die Möglichkeit einer Vorveröffentlichung und schnellen Verbreitung von am SFB laufenden oder ihm nahestehenden Forschungsarbeiten. Ziel der Reihe ist es, die SFB-Forschung einer breiteren Forschungsgemeinschaft zugänglich zu machen. Die Veröffentlichung in der Working Paper Series schließt die Publikation überarbeiteter Versionen desselben Beitrags in anderen Zeitschriften nicht aus. Beiträge von Postdocs und etablierten Wissenschaftlicher*innen werden begrüßt. Die Reihe versteht sich als Publikationsforum für die im SFB vertretenen Wissenschaftler*innen, Projekte und ihre laufende Forschung. Die Beiträge erscheinen im Open Access und in limitierter Printauflage. Wenn Sie einen Beitrag in der Working Paper Series veröffentlichen möchten, reichen Sie bitte Ihren Themenvorschlag in Form eines Abstracts (max. 300 Wörter) zusammen mit einer Kurzvita (max. 50 Wörter) ein. Für die Manuskripteinreichung beachten Sie bitte unser Styleguide. 

Gefördert durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) – Projektnummer 262513311 – SFB 1187. Redaktionelle Verantwortung: Karina Kirsten, Universität Siegen & SFB 1187 Medien der Kooperation.

Nation/Culture/Infrastructure: A Grey Room Intervention

Tuesday, April 21st, 10:00 (PT) / 13:00 (ET) / 19:00 (CET) on Zoom

The editors of Grey Room announce an hour-long webinar on infrastructure as a site of political sovereignty and media-technical force, featuring Rosalind C. Morris (Columbia), Erhard Schüttpelz (PI of P02, Siegen), Julia Velkova (Linköping), and Lisa Parks (Santa Barbara), moderated by Bernard Geoghegan (editor, Grey Room).

The conversation will reflect on twenty-first century infrastructural imperialisms, from the conflicts in Ukraine and Iran to China’s “Belt and Road Initiative,” in light of Marcel Mauss’s 1920s meditations on infrastructure and the nation (published in issue 102 of Grey Room with commentaries by Morris and Schüttpelz). The conversation will also broach emerging questions of methodology and political critique, with particular reference to Schüttpelz’s seminal essay “The Media-Anthropological Turn of Cultural Techniques” (translated in issue 102) and the infrastructural ethnography of Velkova and Parks, “Reimagining Media Historiographies and Satellite Technologies in Bulgaria” (published in issue 103).

For links to the webinar and optional readings, sign up here →