Solidarity and co-presence: digital social networks in family spaces

Transnational migration does not eliminate solidarity networks but rather generates new expectations of collaboration, cohesion, and obligations among migrants and their networks in the country of origin. New communication technologies play an important role in fulfilling these expectations. In contexts of physical separation, these technologies foster a sense of simultaneity (^{Levitt & Glick Schiller, 2004}) that facilitates the maintenance of solidarity ties in transnational spaces. Ethnographic work among the Romanian population in Switzerland and the Italian population in Australia by ^{Baldassar (2008}) and ^{Nedelcu and Wiss (2016}) shows that digital media facilitate feelings and sensations of simultaneity (co-presence), which allow individuals to share activities and everyday life beyond physical distance.

It is necessary to consider some socioeconomic and cultural characteristics to understand how this co-presence may develop in the case of Venezuelan migration in Ecuador. First, while digital platforms such as social networks are widely popular in both countries (^{Bolgov et al., 2017}; ^{Serra et al., 2017}), connection problems are relatively frequent. This is usually due to a lack of economic resources to access these technologies in Ecuador. In the case of Venezuela, financial difficulties are accompanied by greater deficiencies at the infrastructure level, including power outages, poor quality of service, or problems associated with crime. For example, the communication of Nataly, a Venezuelan migrant in Quito, with her mother in Petare─a Caracas neighborhood with high crime rates (^{Cedeño, 2013})─takes place only inside the home for fear of assaults. In fact, on one occasion, the connection to their home in Venezuela was lost due to the theft of an antenna. In this context, family communication often occurs asynchronously through WhatsApp messages that can only be read after a while. Secondly, the crisis in Venezuela makes the sending of remittances and other forms of collaboration an imperative need for most migrants. Such remittance flows are sustained by the stability of Ecuador’s official currency, the US dollar. However, the Ecuadorian economy has experienced a severe contraction in recent years (^{Vera Ortiz et al., 2020}), so sending remittances usually causes great difficulty for migrants. Third, Venezuelan migration is a completely transnational phenomenon, with networks beyond Ecuador-Venezuela, incorporating people in multiple countries in South America, North America, and Europe. Finally, Venezuelan society attaches great importance to the sense of family belonging at the cultural level. The family constitutes more than a kinship unit, as it plays an important role in the organization and ways of understanding life (^{Barbosa Neves & Casimiro, 2018}). Venezuelan migratory waves have not eliminated the family’s central importance, but have generated transnational families (^{Bryceson & Vourela, 2002}) that extend across borders.

With this in mind, this article proposes that the co-presence of Venezuelan migrants and their families through digital media develops mainly in three areas: the fulfillment of moral obligations, the generation of an economy of protection, and emotional support.

First, family dynamics require the maintenance of contact and relationships among its members (^{Stern & Messer, 2009}). In transnational contexts, maintaining contact among family members becomes a symbolic and moral obligation. Synchronous and especially asynchronous communication offered by digital media facilitate this. For example, Maria’s interaction with her extended family in other Latin American and European countries occurs mainly asynchronously through Facebook by posting pictures and commenting on them. Interaction through these images helps to generate a sense of co-presence about the daily activities of the family members and, at the same time, fulfill the obligation to keep in touch. In their words,

Communication with my aunts and cousins (I have many cousins in Germany, Panama, and Chile) is through social networks. I upload a photo, they comment on it, like it, etcetera. So, we are in contact, we know about each other’s lives; we do not really talk, but at least we know about each other’s lives.

In this case, the management of visual (photographs) and textual (comments) material is not a banal act but the reproduction of a cycle of social reciprocity, where participants have obligations to give, receive, and return (^{Mauss, 2009}) through the publication of photographs and comments (“knowing about each other’s lives” in Maria’s words), which is key to maintaining social ties in contexts of physical separation. Tools such as WhatsApp, Facebook, or Zoom allow audiovisual information flows through group connections, allowing members of family units to keep in touch, in an agile way and without losing feelings of co-presence or simultaneity. Thus, for example, Cristina, 31 years old, who was unemployed, states the following:

We have a WhatsApp group, so it has the family’s last name, and it is the group where we upload all our photos every day, and we all say hello to each other. We are all there. And we also have a Facebook group where we upload our memories, our old photos, from when we were together, and those are the main networks where we communicate. We follow each other on Instagram, a few of us, the young ones, but mostly my family’s WhatsApp is where we report every day, and there we upload things and all that.

In general, asynchronous communication in Facebook or WhatsApp groups favors social cohesion among members of an extended family, while closer relationships benefit from direct synchronous exchange. At the generational level, these tools are not limited to younger members but can also include older people with little experience in digital technologies. For example, Nataly taught her mother how to use a smartphone and its main applications just before leaving for Ecuador in 2016. The migratory movement of Venezuelan people took place in a context where social networking technologies were already prevalent.

Furthermore, the co-presence generated by new technologies also plays a role in sending remittances, medicines, and other supplies between Ecuador and the country of origin. ^{Baldassar and Merla (2013}) have shown how the circulation of care is a central element of transnational families. Digital media facilitate communication about the needs of family members, which can influence collaborative processes and, in a broader sense, the creation of a transnational care economy, which includes material as well as emotional remittances. For example, going back to María José’s story, her cousin died during the COVID-19 pandemic. So, the different members of the family followed the burial process and rituals through Zoom, and the family─in different countries─sent remittances to cover the burial expenses. This extended family also sent remittances to María José, who was jobless and in a complicated situation during the pandemic.

The co-presence generated by social networks also influences intergenerational care. In the case of Venezuelan migration, most migrants belong to younger age groups, with older generations being the ones who have mainly stayed in their home country. Social networks allow contact about the care needs of members of the older generation in Venezuela. Belén is a graduate student who migrated to Ecuador along with her immediate family, parents, and siblings. Her grandparents remain in Venezuela, living alone and with no intention of migrating, given their age. The sending of remittances and medicines is constant and is often prompted by communication through audio and video calls. In their words:

But we are always in contact, always, and especially with my grandparents, because they are there. They are older now, so... but yes... I mean, I would say that we are here, but we are also there, but we are always in touch about their needs and how they are and how we can help. So I would say that we are in both places, that is, virtually.

Digital means of communication facilitate contact and the flow of information on the living conditions of the different members of family networks. This allows the collaboration of the members in better conditions through strategies such as sending remittances. All this is supported by what authors such as ^{Levitt and Jaworsky (2007}) call the “transnational moral economy of kin”. In other words, the imaginary, symbolic, or real responsibilities related to a family are extended through transnational connections facilitated by the existence of tools such as social networks.

Finally, transnational migration impacts at an emotional level (^{Boccagni & Baldassar, 2015}; ^{McKay, 2007}). These effects have been even more noticeable during the health crisis and the 2020 lockdowns. In this context, co-presence and social support networks generated from digital media can play an important role. For example, for José─a migrant working in a call center─Christmas festivities are essential to his life. Being far from his family in Venezuela, contact via video call is key from an emotional point of view. In his home, shared with several migrants, during Christmas Day, they all gather together but individually call their families. In their words,

At 11 o’clock, which is already 12 o’clock in Venezuela, we’re all “glued” to our cell phones. Everyone’s on a video call, and those who can’t make a video call are texting with their families. And then it’s like that feeling of how your family’s doing.

Thus, co-presence and social support networks influence the emotional experiences through which migrants experience deterritorialized life. Physical and emotional distances can be shortened through digital communication, according to Belén:

This makes me feel closer to my family. If it didn’t exist, I’d feel the absence, I’d feel far away, I’d feel as if I didn’t have any. But this way, I know they’re there, I know what they’re doing anywhere. I know how they are; it’s like you are everywhere.

The spaces generated within these social networks become not only tools but also shared spaces (^{Hirsch, 2017}), all of which influence the way transnational life is experienced, including emotional dimensions.

Co-presence and constant connection, however, can also be experienced negatively. For example, Domenica─a 40-year-old Venezuelan musician─mentions that the permanent connection with her family generates feelings of anxiety, sadness, and depression as she cannot share physical contact. Consequently, she has started to limit contact through these networks. The type of emotional impact will depend on whether it is structured on an individual level.

Re-imagining the nation: digital social networks in large WhatsApp groups

The previous section developed an approach to solidarity and digital technologies in transnational family contexts. However, these media also allow the connection of people with weak ties or even strangers (^{Phua et al., 2017}), for example, through large groups on platforms such as Facebook or WhatsApp. These groups act as communities centered around particular topics. Their access can be open or restricted by moderators. The rules for participation are delimited both by the sites’ policies and by the approach of the group’s internal moderators. The literature has considered the main dynamics of these group platforms in educational (^{Bergviken Rensfeldt et al., 2018}; ^{Sheeran & Cummings, 2018}), work (^{Pruchniewska, 2019}), political (^{Sanfilippo & Strandburg, 2019}), or healthcare spaces (^{Pernencar & Saboia, 2020}).

The WhatsApp group analyzed in this paper is centered on a community of Venezuelan migrants in Ecuador. At the time of writing, this space consists of 242 participants with a moderator whose functions will be detailed below. Access to the group is given through direct invitation by the moderator or through an invitation link that the members can share. Therefore, most of the participants have no face-to-face contact with each other. The group generally aims to exchange information, trade, and support among migrants.

Participation in this group is open to any member who may submit text, image, audio, or video messages. Any content generated by a member is sent instantly to the rest of the group; however, reading or viewing it will depend on the recipient. Therefore, it is not necessarily a type of synchronous communication. The group moderator is responsible for filtering offensive, harassing, or sexually explicit messages. However, this moderation is not always instantaneous, which has been criticized by some members. Synchronous communication tools such as audio or video calls are not available due to the characteristics of the WhatsApp platform.

The main contents dealt with in this space are trade (generally informal buying and selling of goods among members), information about life in the city (including practical information, transportation, bureaucratic procedures), job offers and job searches (generally informal occupations), and─during the period of analysis─data related to the COVID-19 crisis (for example, status of the border between countries, transportation routes during lockdown, or health). Other materials found are related to housing, news, remittances, and spaces for socializing. Therefore, the contents are associated with spheres linked to life in transnational contexts. Table 1 systematizes the type of information found in this group between September 2020 and February 2021.

The information available in this group is especially relevant for migrants during the first years after their arrival. This coincides with trends in the movement of Venezuelan people in Ecuador, as it is a recent migration, which has intensified since 2015. The information flow through these spaces can be useful for daily life. For example, the process to obtain work visas in Ecuador is often complex due to multiple bureaucratic obstacles through which the State has sought to restrain migration flows. The lack of information on requirements, times, and necessary processes further complicates access to this documentation. Large WhatsApp groups facilitate access to the knowledge necessary to comply with these types of activities. In these cases, a group member generates a question about the type of procedure that needs to be followed, and the rest of the members can interact by sharing relevant data. Similarly, remittances are marketed through this group, generally through remittance agencies that post information on their rates and processes.

This WhatsApp group also generates a network related to the informal trade of goods among its members. Purchasing and selling items such as food (generally from Venezuela), used household appliances, and second-hand home accessories (such as beds, furniture, or gas light bulbs) are extremely common.⁷ Likewise, information related to lodging is frequent.⁸ Information on the most convenient sectors of the city to live in from an economic and logistical point of view, as well as on spaces for shared housing among migrants, is often circulated.⁹ Employment is another issue addressed. Two types of messages are common here: on the one hand, people seeking access to employment in certain areas¹⁰ and, on the other, people sharing information on job offers they have found in different sectors of the city.¹¹ It should be said that this space can also be prone to scams through false or misleading advertisements.

The topics addressed in these groups are not superfluous, but are related to important elements within migration processes. The exchange of information generates possibilities for collaboration and solidarity that can be both in the digital realm and face-to-face. Therefore, this WhatsApp group is a tool and a community for interaction and cooperation (^{Hirsch, 2017}). It is a tool insofar as technological possibilities facilitate direct communication between group members. It is a community insofar as the members share a collective sense of belonging. In this case, the WhatsApp platform replaces the physical space as the axis of interaction. ^{Chayko (2020}) has explored the idea that interaction in contemporary societies is increasingly through the generation of digital communities and ‘communities to go’. These types of communities are not a replacement for physical communities, but their impacts on social life are just as important.

In the context of Venezuelan migration in Ecuador, digital communities present advantages related to the scale and ease with which group members can be reached, that is, the capacity and efficiency in disseminating information (^{Chayko, 2020}). The main element that binds this community on WhatsApp is the sense of belonging to the Venezuelan community within the Ecuadorian territory. ^{Levitt and Glick Schiller (2004}) have emphasized the importance of the sense of ways of belonging to social fields within the logic of transnationalism. In this case, this digital community’s sense of belonging is constructed to the extent that it imagines itself as such based on the dimension of national affiliation (^{Anderson, 1993}).

Finally, it should be emphasized that the field of digital communities is directly related to face-to-face dynamics. It is not possible to establish dichotomous divisions between the digital and the face-to-face spaces. The interactions in this WhatsApp community relate to different practices in the face-to-face sphere through commerce, search for accommodation, and information about daily life, among others. Therefore, the dynamics of cooperation and solidarity are present in the digital field through platforms such as WhatsApp without losing ties with face-to-face contact.

Toward a concept of digital solidarity

The case of Venezuelan migration in Ecuador illustrates how solidarity networks increasingly occupy digital terrains. Without pretending to reach generalizations, this article shows two concrete situations. On the one hand are the interactions in family groups, which are based on a sense of co-presence created through digital media and which can impact transnational life in the field of moral obligations, the conception of an economy of care, and emotional support. On the other hand, some of the dynamics of a large group on WhatsApp, whose interactions open up a possibility of cooperation and solidarity through the exchange of information among its members, were addressed. These groups act as a mainly virtual community. With these considerations, it is possible to define digital solidarity in transnational contexts as those practices aimed at fostering social cohesion and collaboration between migrant groups beyond physical distances and face-to-face contact, using digital media as the main channel. The following are some reflections in this regard.

First, the interactions between migrants in virtual spaces are not disconnected from face-to-face reality. In other words, there is a continuum between practices in digital and face-to-face situations. ^{Chayko (2020}) has noted that all digital interaction requires corporeality, in the sense that the body must interact with technological devices to operate them. Beyond this, the digital dynamics examined in this paper interact with material spheres in that they are oriented toward improving aspects of migrants’ daily lives, whether in economic or emotional spheres, especially in the face of pressing needs in the context of migratory movements in the global south. Identifying dichotomous distinctions that separate the virtual and the face-to-face spaces is becoming increasingly difficult as the barriers between these spaces tend to diminish. In fact, ^{Stewart and Schultze (2019}) state that contemporary solidarity networks are a hybridization of online and face-to-face actions.

Overcoming the dichotomies between the virtual and the face-to-face implies understanding solidarity from a different angle than that of classical theories. As previously mentioned, traditional conceptualizations of solidarity refer to societies with fixed and static territories. The interactions between migrants described in this article show that solidarity networks can be generated in a deterritorialized manner. For example, the co-presence in networks of relatives facilitates feelings of simultaneity among migrants beyond physical distances, which translates into forms of emotional or material support.

The ideal types proposed by nineteenth-century sociology attempted to understand solidarity by differentiating between practices in local or community spaces, and impersonal spaces. Examples of this are the Durkheimian notions of mechanical and organic solidarity (^{Durkheim, 1987}), or Tönnies’ approach to Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft (social relations between individuals based on close personal and family ties, and social relations based on impersonal ties, respectively) (^{Thijssen, 2012}). This article shows how solidarity networks in the digital field are not uniform but vary between transnational families’ personal spaces and large groups on platforms such as WhatsApp. This paper does not seek to suggest new ideal types of solidarity in the digital world but rather to emphasize the complexity and diversity of experiences on digital platforms.

The ways migrants use technology as a function of solidarity networks reflect their capacity for agency. ^{Marino (2021)} argues that technological platforms obtain information (big data) on migrants for commercial purposes. These information mining processes are often undertaken with apparently humanitarian intentions, in what ^{Saura (2020}) has named digital philanthrocapitalism. Likewise, the literature points out that technologies can serve to limit migratory movements through biometric controls (^{Olwig et al., 2020}; ^{Van der Ploeg & Sprenkels, 2011}) or surveillance (^{Nedelcu & Soysüren, 2020}). Beyond the fact that platforms such as Facebook and WhatsApp can collect data on migrants or the capacity of technologies to establish surveillance and control mechanisms, this article has shown that migrants possess a capacity for agency to employ these media according to their interests, establishing collaborative dynamics. For example, in the group described, the WhatsApp platform is a tool and a community, which Venezuelan migrants have adopted for collaboration in areas such as trade, accommodation, or the dissemination of useful information for daily life.

The analysis presented in this article does not seek to romanticize the use of these technologies. If it is considered that the barriers between the digital and face-to-face spheres are not strong, phenomena such as discrimination, conflicts, or scams can also develop within digital areas. In fact, misleading and ill-intentioned job offers can be found in the large WhatsApp group analyzed. ^{Ossewaarde and Reijers (2017)} state that digital media presented as shared economies or digital commons can lead to false illusions and false awareness. This article does not intend to deny these possibilities but simply emphasizes the dynamics of solidarity that can also exist on digital networks.