1.Introduction

In the age of Internet communication, sharing economy platforms have sprung up as new trends that have dramatically changed the way individuals perceive their experiences. BlaBlaCar, the world’s leading online platform offering intercity carpooling services (Guyader 2018Guyader, Hugo 2018 “No One Rides for Free! Three Styles in Collaborative Consumption”. Journal of Services Marketing 32 (6): 692–714. ), has become mainstream in Europe and is gradually replacing traditional ways of travelling (Bostman and Rogers 2011Botsman, Rachel, and Roo Rogers 2011 What’s Mine Is Yours: How Collaborative Consumption Is Changing the Way We Live. Collins.).11.In fact, the company includes more than 100 million users in twenty-two countries. In Spain there were seven million users in 2021, which means that 15% of Spanish people and 37% of users between eighteen and thirty-five years old have used the platform at least once in their lives (data gathered from Expansion.com and BlaBlaCar’s blog). The success of these platforms lies mainly in the fact that they not only offer a particular service (e.g., carpooling), but also the possibility of being part of the same virtual community of practice, or VCoP (Dubé et al. 2005Dubé, Line, Anne Bourhis, and Réal Jacob 2005 “The Impact of Structuring Characteristics on the Launching of Virtual Communities of Practice”. Journal of Organizational Change Management 18 (2): 145–166. ). Their main advertising campaign and trust mechanism is online consumer reviews (OCRs; Zervas, Proserpio and Byers 2014Zervas, Georgios, Davide Proserpio, and John Byers 2014 “The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry”. Working Paper. Boston: Boston University. Retrieved from http://​people​.bu​.edu​/zg​/publications​/airbnb​.pdf) or electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM; Hennig-Thurau et al. 2004Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Kevin Gwinner, Gianfranco Walsh, and Dwayne Gremler 2004 “Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet?” Journal of Interactive Marketing 18 (1): 38–52. ). According to Mudambi and Schuff (2010Mudambi, Susan, and David Schuff 2010 “What Makes a Helpful Online Review? A Study of Consumer Reviews on Amazon.com”. MIS Quarterly 34 (1): 185–200. , 186), OCRs are “peer-generated product evaluations posted on company or third party websites”. Similarly, Hennig-Thurau et al. (2004Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Kevin Gwinner, Gianfranco Walsh, and Dwayne Gremler 2004 “Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet?” Journal of Interactive Marketing 18 (1): 38–52. , 39) define eWOM as “any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual or former customers about a product or company, which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the Internet”.

OCRs are mainly text-based and asynchronous, also considered a form of social media (Vásquez 2014Vásquez, Camilla 2014 The Discourse of Online Consumer Reviews. Bloomsbury Discourse Series. London: Bloomsbury.). Recent platforms, such as those offering peer-to-peer services, have invested huge amounts of money and time in highlighting the importance of community building (Hernández-López 2022Hernández-López, María de la O. 2022 “When Travellers’ Expectations Are Not Met. Rapport Management in Airbnb Online Consumer Reviews with Negative Valence”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 10 (2): 241–268. ), so that users feel the social appeal as part of the peer experience (Ert, Fleisher and Magen 2016Ert, Eyal, Aliza Fleischer, and Nathan Magen 2016 “Trust and Reputation in the Sharing Economy: The Role of Personal Photos in Airbnb”. Tourism Management 55: 62–73. ). This is related to the term ‘affinity space’ (Gee 2004Gee, James Paul 2004 Situated Language and Learning: A Critique of Traditional Schooling. New York: Routledge., 67) defined as: “a place or set of places where people affiliate with others based primarily on shared activities, interests, and goals”.

In other words, these concepts show the contrast between traditional groups, revolving around an existing type of relationship, task at hand or geographical location (e.g., family, friends, co-workers, etc.), and online communities based on shared interests or identities.

In line with this idea, Guyader (2018Guyader, Hugo 2018 “No One Rides for Free! Three Styles in Collaborative Consumption”. Journal of Services Marketing 32 (6): 692–714. , 693) affirms that “collaborative consumption practices […] are embedded with meaningful social interactions”. The sense of communal belonging is so strong that the company studied here, originally called Covoiturage, was rebranded as BlaBlaCar as a more visual identity, emphasizing personal connections (e.g., conversations), and providing opportunities to enrich exchanges between its community members (Guyader 2018Guyader, Hugo 2018 “No One Rides for Free! Three Styles in Collaborative Consumption”. Journal of Services Marketing 32 (6): 692–714. ). In fact, the platform includes the option for drivers to express their preferred level of chattiness in the car: “Bla” for not very chatty, “BlaBla” for someone who likes to talk, and “BlaBlaBla” for those who “can’t keep quiet”. This is related to previous studies that have already demonstrated that collaborative consumption is driven by social reasons: participants want to interact with people and feel that they belong to a virtual community (Guyader 2018Guyader, Hugo 2018 “No One Rides for Free! Three Styles in Collaborative Consumption”. Journal of Services Marketing 32 (6): 692–714. ; Careddu and Montebello 2019).

From a sociological point of view, the demographic group par excellence that makes use of BlablaCar is Generation Y. Generation Y (also known as ‘Millennials’) refers to a generation born between 1981 and 199922.Although there is no consensus regarding when this generation actually starts and ends, it is clear that it is the only generation that spans around 20 years, and which is marked by the presence of smartphones as representative of their lifestyle (Činjarević et al. 2019Činjarević, Merima, Amra Kožo, and Denis Berberović 2019 “Sharing Is Caring, and Millenials Do Care: Collaborative Consumptions Through the Eyes of the Internet Generation”. South East European Journal of Economics and Business 14 (1): 49–60. ). (Wong et al. 2008Wong, Melissa, Elliroma Gardiner, Whitney Lang, and Leah Coulon 2008 “Generational Differences in Personality and Motivation: Do They Exist and What Are the Implications for the Workplace?” Journal of Managerial Psychology 23 (8): 878–890. ), and is highly influential in terms of social trends, consumption, and communication practices.33.This is not surprising, considering that Generation Y is the biggest existing generation to date, and that hyper-connectivity leads them to reach out to large groups of people constantly. They are the first generation to have grown up with smartphones, in a highly interactive activity, which usually blurs the boundaries between face-to-face and digital communication. Their consumption and communicative practices are very influential, with an impact on the shaping of new lifestyle trends (Head 2013Head, Lee Ann 2013 “Will Millennials Drive the Shift from a Consumption-based to a Values-based Economy?” www​.sustainablebrands​.com​/news​_and​_views​/behavior​_change​/will​-millennials​-drive​-shift​-consumption​-basedvaluesbased​-economy (accessed September 3, 2018).). Despite the fact that millennials have been identified as the most prolific users of sharing economy platforms, their response to collaborative consumption has barely been explored (but see Godelnik 2017Godelnik, Raz 2017 “Millennials and the Sharing Economy: Lessons from a ‘Buy Nothing New, Share Everything Month’ Project”. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23: 40–52. ; Hwang and Griffiths 2017Hwang, Jiyoung, and Merlyn Griffiths 2017 “Share More, Drive Less: Millennials Value Perception and Behavioral Intent in Using Collaborative Consumption Services”. Journal of Consumer Marketing 34 (2): 132–146. ; Činjarević et al. 2019Činjarević, Merima, Amra Kožo, and Denis Berberović 2019 “Sharing Is Caring, and Millenials Do Care: Collaborative Consumptions Through the Eyes of the Internet Generation”. South East European Journal of Economics and Business 14 (1): 49–60. ). In the case of their communication styles and the construction of identity in BlaBlaCar reviews, no studies have been found to date.

In this study, we explore 1,000 consumer reviews of BlaBlaCar from a discourse-analytical perspective to understand what they might reveal about millennials’ social practices and identities in this digitally mediated community. More specifically, this study will, first, examine how millennials conceptualize their experiences in BlaBlaCar reviews; second, it will analyse the emergence of identity through labels and implicatures (Bucholtz and Hall 2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. ); and third, it will discuss and understand the relationship between the discursive identity shaped in reviews and millennials’ social identity.

This paper is structured as follows: first, the literature review is presented in three sections, which will contextualize the research questions included therein. The data and method will follow, together with the presentation of the results, which will be organized around the three research questions. The discussion and conclusion sections will close the paper.

2.Users’ conceptualization of reviews

Recent research shows that users of peer-to-peer platforms are concerned with a number of thematic areas that revolve around both the experience and the relationship (usually positive) built with the host or service provider. In Airbnb, the most successful peer-to-peer accommodation platform, for instance, users include up to six thematic areas, such as location, host’s attitude, and interaction (Hernández-López 2019Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. ). In the case of negative Airbnb reviews, in contrast, Hernández-López (2022)Hernández-López, María de la O. 2022 “When Travellers’ Expectations Are Not Met. Rapport Management in Airbnb Online Consumer Reviews with Negative Valence”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 10 (2): 241–268. found eight thematic areas, such as accuracy, cleanliness, and practical issues. Likewise, food-related online experiences, recently launched by Airbnb, show users’ depictions of their experiences around nine themes, including, most frequently, successful food preparation, sociality/commensality,44.The term ‘commensality’ refers to the positive social relationships that are developed around food when people either eat together or prepare their meals. According to Cenni and Vásquez (2020)Cenni, Irene, and Camilla Vásquez 2020 “Airbnb’s Food-Related ‘Online Experiences’: A Recipe for Connection and Escape”. Food and Foodways, Explorations in the History and Culture of Human Nourishment 29 (1): 97–107., digital commensality is a recent practice that may involve at least two people eating by themselves while watching and interacting with each other online, the purpose being to share mealtime experiences. Recently, and mainly due to the pandemic, online experiences involving food preparation have also become frequent. ease of recipe, and food-related learning (Cenni and Vásquez 2020Cenni, Irene, and Camilla Vásquez 2020 “Airbnb’s Food-Related ‘Online Experiences’: A Recipe for Connection and Escape”. Food and Foodways, Explorations in the History and Culture of Human Nourishment 29 (1): 97–107., 5). These topics seem to be very different from experiential online reviews in business-to-peer platforms, such as TripAdvisor, in which users tend to focus their attention on the quality of the hotel (the room, the menu, breakfast, etc.), the quality of the service (whether the receptionist responded to the customer’s complaints, etc.), and/or any aspect of the experience that the user would like to complain about (Vásquez 2011Vásquez, Camilla 2011 “Complaints Online: The Case of Tripadvisor”. Journal of Pragmatics 43(6): 1707–1717. ).

The differences, therefore, are rooted in two facts: first, while TripAdvisor’s reviews are related to hotel/restaurant experiences, in which the relationship with the staff is much more limited in terms of time span and involvement, the conceptualization of sharing economy platforms usually revolves around the importance of living a different social experience (Ert, Fleisher and Magen 2016Ert, Eyal, Aliza Fleischer, and Nathan Magen 2016 “Trust and Reputation in the Sharing Economy: The Role of Personal Photos in Airbnb”. Tourism Management 55: 62–73. ), in which meeting the host and engaging in some kind of temporary relationship is part of the appeal (Hernández-López 2019Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. ). And second, while TripAdvisor is used, on many occasions, as a complaint site (see, for instance, Vásquez 2011Vásquez, Camilla 2011 “Complaints Online: The Case of Tripadvisor”. Journal of Pragmatics 43(6): 1707–1717. ), the sharing economy platforms examined to date are clearly characterized by their positive valence and overt intention to praise the host (Bridges and Vásquez 2018Bridges, Judith, and Camilla Vásquez 2018 “If Nearly All Airbnb Reviews Are Positive, Does That Make Them Meaningless?” Current Issues in Tourism 21 (18): 2057–2075. ). In this sense, while all of them belong to the same genre, the strong sense of community and connectedness found in sharing economy platforms seems to have an impact on the conceptualization of reviews. It is no surprise that the communities shaped around these sites have recently been termed neo-tribes (Hardy and Vorobjovas-Pinta 2021Hardy, Anne, Sara Dolnicar, and Oscar Vorobjovas-Pinta 2021 “The Formation and Functioning of the Airbnb Neo-Tribe. Exploring Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Host Groups”. Tourism Management Perspectives 37: 100760. ).

However, little is known about the themes and functions of reviews in sharing economy platforms offering services other than accommodation. In this context, we have formulated the first Research Question (RQ1) as follows:

In order to answer RQ1, the findings that may be drawn from the thematic analysis of the data will be examined.

3.Identity as a discursive construct

Following Bucholtz and Hall (2005)Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. , identity will be understood as “the social positioning of self and other” (Bucholtz and Hall 2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. , 586) that emerges in discourse. This implies that discursive identity is subject to as much adaptability as discourse itself: it is changeable and subject to constant processes of identification and disidentification (Garcés-Conejos Blitivish and Bou Franch 2019Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Patricia Bou-Franch 2019 “Introduction to Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions”. In Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, ed. by Patricia Bou Franch, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 3–22. Switzerland: Palgrave. ); it is inherently relational (i.e., co-constructed as communication unfolds); and it is co-text- and context-sensitive. Identity can also be either strong (i.e., stable over time) or soft (i.e., unstable and negotiated; Brubaker and Cooper 2000Brubaker, Rogers, and Frederick Cooper 2000 “Beyond ‘Identity’”. Theory and Society 29 (1): 1–47. ; Garcés-Conejos Blitvich and Georgakopoulou 2021Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Alex Georgakopoulou 2021 “Analyzing Identity”. In Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ed. by Michael Haugh, Daniel Kádár, and Marina Terkourafi, 293–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ). Identity, as it is understood for the purposes of this study, also encompasses macro-level demographic categories, such as age (e.g., Generation Y as related to specific discursive practices), as well as temporary roles (e.g., rider and driver in the case of BlaBlaCar OCRs). Bucholtz and Hall (2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. , 594) also argue that identity emerges in discourse and interaction through the following:

1. overt mentioning of identity categories and labels;

2. implicatures and presuppositions;

3. displayed evaluative and epistemic orientations to ongoing talk; interactional footings and participant roles;

4. the use of linguistic structures and systems that are ideologically associated with specific personas or groups.

The linguistic resources mentioned above can be either very explicit and obvious, as in the case of labels, or implicit and unconscious, as in the case of implicated, unintended meanings invoked by discourse and other semiotic resources. Related to this, recent studies have pointed to the complexity and constant transmutability of virtual communication (Garcés-Conejos Blitvich and Bou Franch 2019Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Patricia Bou-Franch 2019 “Introduction to Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions”. In Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, ed. by Patricia Bou Franch, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 3–22. Switzerland: Palgrave. ), in which processes of translocality and transmediality, together with the multimodality of most sites including audiovisual content (Yus 2016Yus, Francisco 2016 Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ), implies that both explicatures and implicatures are created through processes in which the offline-online worlds intermingle and affect the emergence of new meanings and identities. In this vein, the term identities-in-interaction (Garcés-Conejos Blitvich and Georgakopoulou 2021Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Alex Georgakopoulou 2021 “Analyzing Identity”. In Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ed. by Michael Haugh, Daniel Kádár, and Marina Terkourafi, 293–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ) is preferred and is affected by the so-called context collapse (Marwick and boyd 2011Marwick, Alice and dana boyd 2011 “I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience”. New Media & Society 13 (1): 114–133. ; Page 2012Page, Ruth 2012 Stories and Social Media: Identities and Interaction. Oxford: Routledge.) that occurs when different social groups come together on the same site. All these factors make virtual identities a complex issue. In the case of consumer reviews in BlaBlaCar, information is, mostly, text-based, given that memes, videos, and other multimodal resources are not allowed on the site. Nonetheless, the complexity of reviews lies in the fact that these are influenced by the constant intermingling of users’ offline-online communication (i.e., translocality; see Hernández-López 2019Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. ), as well as the use of different sites and social media to communicate among peers (i.e., transmediality). Consequently, invoked meaning, vis-à-vis explicit meaning, may be created in many complex ways that can only be fully understood by the participants of the offline-online exchange.

Furthermore, the concept of positionality (i.e., interactants positioning themselves) is also important for the study of reviews: individuals evaluate someone, and by means of that evaluation, they align or disalign with the addressee (Du Bois 2002Du Bois, John W. 2002 “Stance and Consequence”. In The Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, New Orleans.), depending on the positive or negative orientation of OCRs. In other words, any spoken or written text will provide information regarding particular identity relations that are discursively created, be it to confirm or neglect ideologies attached to those macro variables. In this sense, computer mediated texts such as reviews may inform about identity characteristics of a particular age group or generation, among others.

According to Bucholtz and Hall (2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. , 598), identities are “intersubjectively constructed” through relations of adequation and distinction, among others. Adequation refers to the positioning of individuals as alike, in a way that the similarities that are perceived as “salient to and supportive of the immediate project of identity work will be foregrounded” (Bucholtz and Hall 2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. , 599). In contrast, the identity relation of distinction involves “the suppression of similarities that might undermine the construction of difference” (ibid., 600).

The many facets of identity in discourse also make it difficult to grasp or understand, and it is not always obvious at first glance. This is partly motivated by the fact that any type of attribution only makes sense in a local context (Garcés-Conejos Blitvich and Georgakopoulou 2021Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Alex Georgakopoulou 2021 “Analyzing Identity”. In Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ed. by Michael Haugh, Daniel Kádár, and Marina Terkourafi, 293–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ), but it also presents continuity across situations and/or interactions (Wortham 2010Wortham, Stanton 2010 Learning Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.).

Following Tagg and Segeant (2014) and Tagg and Segeant (2016), both self- presentation and relational practices occur simultaneously in most CMC sites as part of today’s participatory culture, and BlaBlaCar is no exception in this respect. In this regard, we contend that what is said in reviews, together with how it is said, may inform about the online (individual and relational) identities of the self and the other. Although the group examined here makes up an online community with both offline and online contact, the relationship is limited in terms of both time and space55.See Hernández-López (2019)Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. for a detailed account of the online/offline stages in collaborative consumption sites. and does not necessarily have continuity after the final write-up of reviews (unless users explicitly express their interest in follow-up encounters). In this sense, ties can vary in terms of intensity from very loose and temporary to very strong and permanent.

Although identity in consumer reviews has previously been studied in the literature (e.g., Vásquez 2014Vásquez, Camilla 2014 The Discourse of Online Consumer Reviews. Bloomsbury Discourse Series. London: Bloomsbury., among others), it is self-identity that has been the focus of attention. This is due to the fact that product or experiential reviews belonging to a pre-sharing economy period revolve around the evaluation of something (e.g., a hotel experience, an Amazon product, dining at a restaurant, etc.), rather than someone. Given the peer-to-peer nature of sharing economy platforms, reviews involve evaluations of someone, and therefore, the addressee’s identity is called into question. In this sense, virtual-physical congruence (Yus 2014Yus, Francisco 2014 “El discurso de las identidades en línea: el caso de Facebook”. Discurso y Sociedad 8 (3): 398–426., 2022Yus, Franscisco 2022 Smartphone Communication. Interactions in the App Ecosystem. New York: Routledge.; Xie and Yus 2017Xie, Chaoqun, and Francisco Yus 2017 “An Internet Dialogue on Internet Pragmatics”. Foreign Language and Literature Studies 34 (2): 75–92.) gains prominence more than ever before, as faults in the offline world will have very sensitive consequences online. Given the importance of this fact and the gap found in the literature, this study focuses on drivers’ identities as constructed by passengers through their discourse in online reviews. Thus, the focus of attention is the other and the relationship with the other, rather than the self.

The abovementioned concepts are the breeding ground for the current study, which sets out to examine drivers’ identity as expressed by reviewers (i.e., former passengers). More specifically, and following Bucholtz and Hall (2005)Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. , this study will focus on labels (i.e., conscious, explicit identity) with regard to individual identities (Brewer and Gardner 1996Brewer, Marilyn B., and Wendy Gardner 1996 “Who Is This ‘‘We’’? Levels of Collective Identity and Self Representations”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71 (1): 83–93. ) and implicatures (i.e., identity as invoked) with regard to the drivers’ interpersonal or relational identities (Brewer and Gardner 1996Brewer, Marilyn B., and Wendy Gardner 1996 “Who Is This ‘‘We’’? Levels of Collective Identity and Self Representations”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71 (1): 83–93. ). In this context, we pose the second RQ:

In order to answer RQ2, the labels used to praise drivers will be examined in the data set analyzed here. Furthermore, reviewers’ hints or comments addressed to drivers will also be examined. These refer back to events occurring during the offline experience but are not explicitly explained in reviews.

4.Millennial identity and their virtual self

Generation Y (also called the ‘Millennial Generation’) refers to a generation born between 1981 and 1999 (Wong et al. 2008Wong, Melissa, Elliroma Gardiner, Whitney Lang, and Leah Coulon 2008 “Generational Differences in Personality and Motivation: Do They Exist and What Are the Implications for the Workplace?” Journal of Managerial Psychology 23 (8): 878–890. ), which is currently highly influential in terms of social trends, consumption, and communication practices. They are also called ‘Connect 24/7’ (Schoer 2008Schroer, William 2008 “Generations X, Y, Z and the Others”. The Portal 40 (9). Retrieved from http://​iam​.files​.cms​-plus​.com​/newimages​/portalpdfs​/2008​_03​_04​.pdf (accessed September 1, 2018).). Its members are ‘digital natives’ (Prensky 2001Prensky, Marc 2001 “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants”. On the Horizon 9 (5): 1–6. ): they have grown up in a context of highly interactive activity, which usually blurs the boundaries between face-to-face and digital communication.

It is in this context of techno-centricity that the characteristics of millennials have been shaped as based on both individuality and the relationship with others. Regarding their individuality (Venter 2017Venter, Elza 2017 “Bridging the Communication Gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer Generation”. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 22 (4): 497–507. ), they tend to seek both self-enhancement online and emotional rewards in exchange for their positive social behaviour (Činjarević et al. 2019Činjarević, Merima, Amra Kožo, and Denis Berberović 2019 “Sharing Is Caring, and Millenials Do Care: Collaborative Consumptions Through the Eyes of the Internet Generation”. South East European Journal of Economics and Business 14 (1): 49–60. ). They try to differentiate themselves from their peers in terms of originality and values. They also seek group interaction and connectedness regularly to fulfil their need for constant feedback (Venter 2017Venter, Elza 2017 “Bridging the Communication Gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer Generation”. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 22 (4): 497–507. ), be it via social media, mobile apps for communicating, or sharing economy platforms. Not surprisingly, this generation of multi-taskers has often been labelled hedonistic, in that they search for instant gratification and rewards through different networking sites simultaneously (Venter 2017Venter, Elza 2017 “Bridging the Communication Gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer Generation”. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 22 (4): 497–507. ), in a way such that they feel they belong to several affinity spaces (Gee 2005Gee, James Paul 2005 “Semiotic Social Spaces and Affinity Spaces: From the Age of Mythology to Today’s Schools”. In Beyond Communities of Practice: Language, Power and Social Context, ed. by David Barton, and Karin Tusting, 214–232. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ; Jenkins 2006Jenkins, Henry 2006 Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York, NY: NYU Press.) that fit their various selves. Thus, they try to optimize self-presentation and use identity cues that are both socially accepted in a given community and easy to identify within the group, so as to facilitate relationships with their peers (Sherblom 2010Sherblom, John 2010 “The Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) Classroom: A Challenge of Medium, Presence, Interaction, Identity, and Relationship”. Communication Education 59 (4): 497–523. ).

For millennials, support of others in their lives is crucial to them, with strong feelings of entitlement and desire for public recognition of their achievements. In contrast, they will challenge others (mainly those in authority) if they feel they are not getting the recognition they deserve when they have made a valuable contribution (Venter 2017Venter, Elza 2017 “Bridging the Communication Gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer Generation”. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 22 (4): 497–507. ). In this respect, they differ from previous generations, such as the Boomer Generation (1946–1964), whose members tend not to express their rights so openly, and adapt to others’ behaviour more easily (Morton 2002Morton, Lee 2002 “Targeting Generation Y”. Public Relations Quarterly 47 (2): 46–48., 48). This, at times, may also lead to a lack of online manners and responsibility, as well as insensitivity (Black 2010Black, Alison 2010 “Gen Y: Who They Are and How They Learn”. Educational Horizons 88 (2): 92–101.).

Millennials communicate unlike any other generation (Rainer and Rainer 2011Rainer, Tom, and Jess Rainer 2011 The Millennials: Connecting to America’s Largest Generation. New York: Lifeway Research.),66.However, Generation Z or Centennials (born after 2000) are quickly gaining ground in this respect. and they prefer text to other forms of communication that are more time consuming (Rainer and Rainer 2011Rainer, Tom, and Jess Rainer 2011 The Millennials: Connecting to America’s Largest Generation. New York: Lifeway Research.), with user technology as the stepping-stone for face-to-face communication. This means that, while they will try to show their best version of themselves online, there must be virtual-physical congruence (Yus 2014Yus, Francisco 2014 “El discurso de las identidades en línea: el caso de Facebook”. Discurso y Sociedad 8 (3): 398–426.) with regard to their identity, mainly when it comes to sites in which online-offline components intermingle. Indeed, millennials are the first generation to skilfully overcome the lack of social presence (Venter 2017Venter, Elza 2017 “Bridging the Communication Gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer Generation”. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 22 (4): 497–507. ) through different devices that not only involve the use of emoticons and verbal cues, but also the wording, length, and expressiveness of the message. In this sense, they are able to communicate virtual connectedness and a sense of group membership to a mass of other individuals (and the more, the better), much more adeptly than older generations (Venter 2017Venter, Elza 2017 “Bridging the Communication Gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer Generation”. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 22 (4): 497–507. ).

From a marketing perspective, millennials are seen as trendsetters, demanding and difficult to reach in the market, with little or no interest in traditional media (Kruger and Saayman 2015Kruger, Martinette, and Melville Saayman 2015 “Music Preferences of Generation Y: Evidence from Live Music Performances in South Africa”. Journal of Vacation Marketing 21 (4): 1–17. ). In this sense, they represent the shift from ownership (a house, a car, a music CD, etc.) to access (sharing accommodation, a seat in somebody else’s car, listening to music via streaming apps). They create public opinion online constantly (e.g., in social media, the purchase of products, online forums, newspapers, access to a variety of services, online review sites, etc.) in a way that “word of mouth is the best method of marketing to them [Generation Ys]” (Morton 2002Morton, Lee 2002 “Targeting Generation Y”. Public Relations Quarterly 47 (2): 46–48., 48), since they value their peers’ opinions enormously. They also tend to use platforms that comply with a certain type of lifestyle and fun (Morton 2002Morton, Lee 2002 “Targeting Generation Y”. Public Relations Quarterly 47 (2): 46–48.), and they tend to mix business and entertainment. They also assume that “getting heard, having your say and becoming well known” is just natural (Morton 2002Morton, Lee 2002 “Targeting Generation Y”. Public Relations Quarterly 47 (2): 46–48., 48).

According to Činjarević et al. (2019)Činjarević, Merima, Amra Kožo, and Denis Berberović 2019 “Sharing Is Caring, and Millenials Do Care: Collaborative Consumptions Through the Eyes of the Internet Generation”. South East European Journal of Economics and Business 14 (1): 49–60. , millennials’ reasons for using BlaBlaCar revolve around four values or motivations, which are also informative of their identity: The economic or functional value (e.g., cost savings, useful), the hedonic value (i.e., users’ search for fun, self-enhancement, and ego identification), the symbolic value (i.e., the association of the service with psychological, ideological or emotional issues), and the social value (which stems from the need to interact with others, both online and offline). Social motivations, in particular, are related to communication, social networks, a sense of community and group membership, as well as users sharing and relationship-building with others. It involves highlighting the importance of communication and interaction, depicting the relationship with other users, and highlighting the benefits of this relationship. Figure 1 summarizes the main characteristics of Generation Y.

Consequently, millennials have been recognized as the most representative consumer group regarding sharing economy activities like Airbnb and BlaBlaCar, among others (Head 2013Head, Lee Ann 2013 “Will Millennials Drive the Shift from a Consumption-based to a Values-based Economy?” www​.sustainablebrands​.com​/news​_and​_views​/behavior​_change​/will​-millennials​-drive​-shift​-consumption​-basedvaluesbased​-economy (accessed September 3, 2018).), in a way that “collaborative consumption for this generation presents a natural fit” (Činjarević et al. 2019Činjarević, Merima, Amra Kožo, and Denis Berberović 2019 “Sharing Is Caring, and Millenials Do Care: Collaborative Consumptions Through the Eyes of the Internet Generation”. South East European Journal of Economics and Business 14 (1): 49–60. , 49). However, while millennials have been fully explored in business contexts recently (see Godelnik 2017Godelnik, Raz 2017 “Millennials and the Sharing Economy: Lessons from a ‘Buy Nothing New, Share Everything Month’ Project”. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23: 40–52. ; Hwang and Griffiths 2017Hwang, Jiyoung, and Merlyn Griffiths 2017 “Share More, Drive Less: Millennials Value Perception and Behavioral Intent in Using Collaborative Consumption Services”. Journal of Consumer Marketing 34 (2): 132–146. ), there is little research regarding their identities-in-interaction. Based on this, we pose the third RQ:

In order to answer RQ3, this study includes a discussion section in which the results regarding RQ2 (discursive identity via labels and implicatures) will be contrasted with the social, global identity that has been identified with millennials in the literature, focusing especially on their social value.

5.Data and method

5.1Data

Data were gathered from the world’s leading intercity carpooling platform, BlaBlaCar, which connects drivers with empty seats to riders who are willing to pay a small fee for the trip (Farajallah et al. 2019Farajallah, Mehdi, Robert G. Hammond, and Thierry Pénard 2019 “What Drives Pricing Behavior in Peer-to-Peer Markets? Evidence from the Carsharing Platform BlaBlaCar”. Information Economics and Policy 48 (C): 15–31. , 15). More specifically, the data set comprises 1,000 reviews gathered from www​.BlaBlaCar​.es between 9th November and 10th December 2020. They refer to former passengers’ opinions about drivers who had carpooled to and/or from any major destination in Spain. The reviews, written by millennials (born between 1981 and 1999),77.Given that the success of the sharing economy greatly depends on trust, most companies have enabled different mechanisms to ensure that users’ information is truthful and reliable. BlaBlaCar, in particular, has removed any possibility of anonymity; registered users must send a copy of their ID and driving license prior to having an account; telephone numbers are also verified. Thus, every user’s name, nationality, and age are real (Mazella and Sundaranjan 2016Mazella, Frédéric, and Arun Sundaranjan 2016 “Entering the Trust Age”. Retrieved from: https://​blog​.blablacar​.com​/wp​-content​/uploads​/2016​/05​/entering​-the​-trust​-age​.pdf). range between one and 145 words, and all of them refer to positive experiences, which is the tendency on the platform88.This is the norm in collaborative consumption. See Bridges and Vásquez (2018)Bridges, Judith, and Camilla Vásquez 2018 “If Nearly All Airbnb Reviews Are Positive, Does That Make Them Meaningless?” Current Issues in Tourism 21 (18): 2057–2075. and Hernández-López (2019)Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. for an explanation of the positive bias in peer-to-peer platforms. Besides, the reason why only positive experiences were included is that the reviewer’s goals when writing positive reviews are very different from those involved in posting negative reviews. While users posting positive experiences seek to express their positive emotions, show concern for other consumers or feel they are part of the same community of users by means of self- and other-enhancement, those posting negative reviews seek to complain, vent their negative feelings or warn other users (Hennig-Thurau et al. 2004Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Kevin Gwinner, Gianfranco Walsh, and Dwayne Gremler 2004 “Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet?” Journal of Interactive Marketing 18 (1): 38–52. ; Pinch and Kesler 2011). As a consequence, the content, tone, and style will vary (see also the differences between positive and negative reviews in Hernández-López 2022Hernández-López, María de la O. 2022 “When Travellers’ Expectations Are Not Met. Rapport Management in Airbnb Online Consumer Reviews with Negative Valence”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 10 (2): 241–268. ). Previous studies usually examine these data separately for these reasons. (in fact, only twelve negative reviews were found and excluded from the data set during the selection process).

5.2Method

In order to find experienced users (i.e., with more than five reviews), the section “see our most popular rides” was used. Within this section, a number of destinations is listed:

Figure 2.Trips examined to find reviews written about experienced drivers (retrieved 25th November 2020)

More than 4,000 reviews were found in this section. After discarding first-time reviewers, reviews not written in Spanish, those that were negative and those written by individuals not born between 1980 and 1999, a final corpus of 1,000 reviews was extracted.

The analysis of the data is based on the computer-mediated discourse analysis (CMDA) perspective proposed by Herring (2004Herring, Susan 2004 “Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Behavior”. In Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service Learning, ed. by Sasha Barab, Rob Kling, and James Hay, 338–376. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , 2019Herring, Susan C. (2019) “The Coevolution of Computer-mediated Communication and Computer-mediated Discourse Analysis”. In Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, ed. by Patrica Bou Franch, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 25–68. Switzerland: Palgrave. ), “grounded in empirical, textual observations” and “informed by a linguistics perspective” (Herring 2004Herring, Susan 2004 “Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Behavior”. In Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service Learning, ed. by Sasha Barab, Rob Kling, and James Hay, 338–376. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , 339). More specifically, this study is grounded in digital discourse analysis, or how text-based and other online semiotic resources can enact virtual identities and other social actions as part of a larger social world (Gee 2005Gee, James Paul 2005 “Semiotic Social Spaces and Affinity Spaces: From the Age of Mythology to Today’s Schools”. In Beyond Communities of Practice: Language, Power and Social Context, ed. by David Barton, and Karin Tusting, 214–232. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ). In this sense, we understand discourse as part of social practice (Fairclough 1992Fairclough, Norman 1992 Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.), now adapted to CMC.

Our analytical procedure consists of three stages, each of which answers each of the aforementioned RQs. The first stage involves a thematic examination of the full data set (1,000 reviews), following Patton (2014)Patton, Michael 2014 Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage., with the aim of understanding how users conceptualize their BlaBlaCar experiences. This phase consists of the detailed and iterative reading of the reviews in the data set in order to identify recurring topics or themes, which were annotated and coded using NViVo12. The second stage consisted of examining a convenient selection of reviews from our sample that were informative in terms of identity (i.e., reviews as brief as ‘everything ok’, or just ‘perfect’, for instance, were discarded because of the poor information these might provide regarding identity). This second stage aims to understand how individual and relational identities emerge in interaction as processes of intragroup affiliation both explicitly (e.g., through the use of labels) and implicitly (mainly via invoked meanings), in relation to the most recurrent themes examined in stage one. The third phase aims to discuss the extent to which reviewers’ identities-in-interaction (Garcés-Conejos Blitvich and Georgakopoulou 2021Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Alex Georgakopoulou 2021 “Analyzing Identity”. In Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ed. by Michael Haugh, Daniel Kádár, and Marina Terkourafi, 293–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ) are in tune with their intragroup, age-related social identity (Generation Y). Table 1 below summarizes these stages.

Table 1.Stages regarding the methodological procedure of the study

Stage 1 (RQ1)	Thematic analysis of 1,000 reviews.
Stage 2 (RQ2)	Analysis of individual identity through labels; analysis of relational identities through invoked meanings or implicatures.
Stage 3 (RQ3)	Discussion: the relationship between the identities-in-interaction revealed in the findings and millennials’ macro identity.

Below, we present the results of our analysis in three sections, each of them devoted to answering each of the RQs.

6.Results

6.1Thematic analysis

The analysis of the data reveals the occurrence of eight main themes: 1. overall or generic description (e.g., ‘the journey was great’); 2. user’s personal experience (e.g., ‘it was my best BlaBlaCar experience’); 3. specific features of the journey (e.g., ‘it was a rainy day, but the journey was safe’); 4. driving style and driver’s traits (e.g., ‘safe driving’); 5. pick-up/drop-off (e.g., ‘he drove me to the bus station’); 6. communication prior to trip (e.g., ‘there was heavy traffic, but she kept me posted before picking me up’); 7. personal traits (e.g., ‘he was so entertaining!’); and 8. conversation/communication (e.g., ‘he can talk about any topic and the conversation was really interesting’). These themes are grouped into three categories: The journey (1–3), driving (4–6), and personal characterization (7–8).

Table 2 below summarizes these findings, and singles out some of the subthemes found in topics number 3 and 7.

Table 2.Themes found in BlaBlaCar reviews

The journey
	1. Overall		198	19.8%
	2. Experience		117	11.7%
	3. Features of the journey		346	34.6%
		3.1. Music	16	1.6%
		3.2. The car	38	3.8%
Driving
	4. Driving and driver’s traits		294	29.4%
	5. Pick-up/Drop-off		90	9%
	6. Prior to trip		12	1.2%
Personal characterization
	7. Personal traits		561	56.1%
		7.1. Punctuality	210	21%
		7.2. Flexibility	46	4.6%
	8. Conversation		197	19.7%

The most frequent category is the one depicting personal traits (56.1%), followed by the features of the journey (34.6%) and driver’s traits (29.4%). In other words, two of the three most frequent themes revolve around the description of the driver, be it a personal characterization (e.g., ‘friendly’) or role-related description (e.g., ‘good driver’), by means of labelling, narratives, and other more implicit processes. All this, needless to say, involves ‘identity work’ from the reviewer’s perspective. Regarding other themes, experience (11.7%), features of the journey (34.6%), and conversation (19.7%) are socially oriented themes expressed in terms of not only labels, but also descriptions of the experience and implicit messages, which usually display interest in relationship-building and/or enhancement. A note of interest here is that audience design (Virtanen 2017Virtanen, Tuija 2017 “Adaptability in Online Consumer Reviews: Exploring Genre Dynamics and Interactional Choices”. Journal of Pragmatics 111: 77–90. ) will influence both review style and the emergence of identities. In particular, while most of the reviews do not specify who the review is addressing (e.g., “me encantó viajar con María. Es encantadora” ‘I loved travelling with María. She is wonderful’), on sixty-four occasions reviewers explicitly address the driver (e.g., “gracias, María!” ‘Thank you, María!’). Only on eleven occasions do reviewers address the rest of the community, as in “no dudéis en viajar con él” (‘you should definitely travel with him’). The following section will illustrate how these themes help shape the addressee’s identity.

6.2Identity construction (RQ2)

Given that consumer reviews of this type depict both present emotions at the time of drafting the review and the recall of experiences, the creation of identities-in-interaction is complex and multi-layered, involving processes of translocality and transmediality. Reviews also reveal users’ awareness of their role-related profiles (in bold) within the community, as in REV01:

REV01

Como conductor, le daría un 10/10. Hace que sus pasajeros se sientan cómodos en todo momento.

As a driver, I would give him 10/10. He makes his passengers feel comfortable at all times.

Some users also make explicit comments regarding their macro-social, age-related identities, as in REV02:

REV02

El viaje fue genial! Nos echamos unas risas y me alegré de ver que allí se podía hablar de todo porque no había gente mayor.

The journey was great! We laughed a lot and I was pleased to see that we could talk about everything because there were no older people there.

However, participants usually index their youth, as well as other identities, in more implicit, maybe unconscious ways. REV03, which explicitly addresses the driver, contains stylistic and register features that are indicative not only of their age but also of the type of relationship and communication developed during the carpooling experience:

REV03

Bua tío viaje mazo guapo escuxando rock nacional del weno 10/10

Whoa, totally awesome trip dude, listening to sick rock choonz 10/10

Below, we will analyze both explicit mentions of individual identity through labels (Section 6.2.1) and invoked relational identities (Section 6.2.2).

6.2.1Labelling as a process of individual identity formation

While labels are present in almost every review in the data set, the three themes that most clearly and most explicitly describe the drivers and users’ experiences are ‘driver’s traits’, ‘personal traits’ and ‘experience’ (see Table 2). A selection of reviews in Table 3 below illustrates the importance of labels concerning identities, mainly in relation to these three themes (the themes are indicated in capital letters).

Table 3.Selection of reviews to understand the presence of labelling

REV01 Como conductor, le daría un 10/10. Hace que sus pasajeros se sientan cómodos en todo momento. As a driver, I would give him 10/10. He makes his passengers feel comfortable at all times.

REV02 El viaje fue genial! Nos echamos unas risas y me alegré de ver que allí se podía hablar de todo porque no había gente mayor. The journey was great! We laughed a lot and I was pleased to see that we could talk about everything because there were no older people there.

REV03 Bua tío viaje mazo guapo escuxando rock nacional del weno 10/10 Whoa, totally awesome trip dude, listening to sick rock choonz 10/10

REV04 Curro es genial, el viaje se nos hizo muy corto a pesar del tráfico. Conduce fenomenal pero como persona es aún mejor. Repetiría. Curro is great, the journey went quickly in spite of the traffic. He’s a great driver but an even better person. I’d definitely go again.

REV05 Un viaje de amigos, así me sentí!! Iba nerviosa por ir con 3 hombres y a esas horas de la mañana, pero desde el momento en el que Julen salió a recibirme me relaje. Es un chico súper simpático, amable, educado… . el coche amplio, limpio y nuevo. Su conducción muy muy buena y su tomtom ayuda mucho a no perder tiempo en el viaje con atascos. Sin duda recomendable muy recomendable, ni 1 sola pega. A road trip with friends, that’s how it felt. I was nervous going with 3 men and at that time in the morning, but as soon as Julen came out to greet me I relaxed. He’s a really nice guy, friendly, polite… the car was spacious, clean, and new. He drives really really well and his tomtom meant we didn’t waste time on the journey with traffic jams. Highly recommended, absolutely. Not 1 single complaint.

REV06 Viaje de 10. Súper buen rollo, flexibilidad a la hora de hacer todo funcionar. Volvería a repetir sin dudar. Gracias! 10 out of 10. Really good vibes, flexible in terms of making it all work. I would definitely do it again. Thanks!

REV07 Viajar con Alex es la leche! Se nos hizo corto el viaje con la de aventuras que nos contó. Súper recomendable!!! A ver si coincidimos de nuevo :) Travelling with Alex is awesome! The journey went really quickly with all the adventures he was telling us about. Would absolutely recommend!!! Hope we can meet up again someday :)

REV08 Aleix es un excelente conductor, una persona muy maja, un conversador muy bueno, y muy cuidadoso con la seguridad y la protección en esta situación de pandemia. El viaje fue estupendo, se hizo muy corto. La conducción muy buena, llegamos antes de lo previsto, e incluso se ofreció a acercarnos a otro punto que nos viniese mejor. Repetiría sin dudarlo, muy recomendable. Gracias Aleix. Aleix is an excellent driver, a really nice person, great to talk to, and very careful in terms of safety and precautions with the pandemic. The journey was great, it went by really quickly. Very good driver, we arrived ahead of schedule, and he even offered to drop us off somewhere else that was more convenient for us. I would definitely do it again, highly recommended. Thanks Aleix.

REV09 Grandísimo compañero de viaje, con el cual el viaje se hizo ameno. Extramadamente educado, simpático y abierto. Great travelling buddy, so the trip was really nice. Extremely polite, friendly, and open.

REV10 María ha resultado ser un descubrimiento en el viaje que compartimos a Oporto. En primer lugar, fue rápida contestando a mensajes y amable. La experiencia fue más allá de compartir viaje, ya que fue abierta y flexible y pudimos conocernos mejor! la recomiendo!! Maria was an absolute discovery on the trip we shared to Porto. First of all, she answered messages really quickly and was friendly. The experience went beyond sharing a journey, she was open and flexible and we got to know each other better! I would recommend her!!

As illustrated in Table 3, the labels included in the reviews revolve around three main themes: those that are role-related, such as “conduce fenomenal” (‘a great driver’, REV04) and “excelente conductor” (‘an excellent driver’, REV08); those that highlight personal identity traits, such as “como persona es aún mejor” (‘an even better person’, REV04); and those that refer to the experience itself, such as “súper buen rollo” (‘really good vibes’, REV06). All three cases clearly illustrate the reviewers’ awareness of the type of platform they are on and the role they assume therein; on the other hand, their need to excel in those roles and provide a more personal touch is ever present, with descriptions about both users as individuals and the experience from a personal, individual perspective, which usually goes beyond the carpooling event (see, for instance, REV10, “la experiencia fue más allá de compartir viaje” ‘the experience went beyond sharing a journey’). Overall, colloquial labels as an index of youth often reveal connectedness and a sense of groupness (e.g., “Alex es la leche” ‘Alex is awesome’, in REV07, or in “super buen rollo” ‘really good vibes’ in REV06). These also occur in less informal terms, as in “simpatico, amable, educado” (‘nice, friendly, polite’, REV05). The importance of the relationship as peers is recurrent in the data set, with labels such as “amigos” (‘friends’, REV05) or “compañero” (‘buddy’, REV09). These labels contribute to the emergence of specific identities that point to their sense of alignment and adequation (Bucholtz and Hall 2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. ) with the addressee, with a tendency towards the creation of strong, rather than loose ties (at least in the digital environment). Whether reviewers index their youth through language choices or decide to maintain a more neutral tone, what seems obvious here is that the relationship developed during the journey is central in the description of the experience. Through an affiliative tone, it shows covert intention to maintain, consciously or unconsciously, the type of temporary identity created during the journey (a friendly, fun-to-be-with individual, who is speaking as a friend, rather than a passenger), with special care in maintaining their virtual-physical congruence (Yus 2014Yus, Francisco 2014 “El discurso de las identidades en línea: el caso de Facebook”. Discurso y Sociedad 8 (3): 398–426.). Thus, the term “compañero” (‘buddy’, REV09, instead of ‘driver’, for instance) brings about the twofold implicature that users are coeval and that they have a certain sense of connectedness based on their previous relational experience. In parallel, reviews provide some invoked identity information about the reviewer as an easy-going, reliable individual. In this sense, the reviews in BlaBlaCar are highly informative of the offline experience, both parties’ individual identities, and their relational identity. The latter is also built in more indirect ways, as we will see below.

6.2.2Hints as processes of invoked identities-in-interaction

The relational and social nature of BlaBlaCar is also seen in one peculiarity found in the data set, with no precedent in business-to-peer consumer reviews: phatic utterances in the form of hints or messages addressed to the driver in more or less explicit ways, charged with rich information about their relationship or ties between them. In this sense, many reviewers do not use the review to provide information, but to relate to their peers. A selection of these reviews is included in Table 4 below.

Table 4.Selection of reviews in which reviewers address drivers

REV11 Viaje estupendo con Alex, un tío simpático, educado y hablador. Nos tocaron dos tías siesas y aburridas que se sentaron atrás y no dijeron ni mu en todo el viaje, pero él y yo nos bastamos, jaja. Un placer, recomendable al 100% Great trip with Alex, a nice guy, polite and talkative. There were two boring snooty girls who sat in the back and didn’t say a word for the whole journey, but he and I had all we needed with each other, haha. A pleasure, 100% recommended.

REV12 Bua tío viaje mazo guapo escuxando rock nacional del weno 10/10 Whoa, totally awesome trip dude, listening to sick rock choonz 10/10

REV13 Buen viaje con una buena cuadrilla. Nos vemos el prox año en San Fermín, chicos! Great trip with a great gang. See you next year at San Fermin guys!

REV14 Irina es muy maja y muy puntual. Se me hizo muy ameno todo el trayecto. Su conversación ha hecho que el viaje pareciese mas corto. Y por cierto Irina, siento lo de tu chaqueta jaja. Espero que con estos cumplidos lo haya arreglado :) Irina is really friendly and very punctual. The trip was really nice. Her conversation made the journey seem shorter. And by the way, Irina, I’m sorry about your jacket, haha. I hope that I’ve made up for it with these compliments :)

REV15 Todo perfecto, súper puntual, buen conversador y buen conductor. En dos viajes más con el arreglamos España All perfect, super punctual, good conversation and a good driver. In a couple more trips with him we’ll have put Spain to rights

REV16 Un viaje cómodo y ameno, puntual y simpático, muy recomendable. Te deja donde quieras, no como los típicos capullos que te dejan to lejos de cualquier sitio. A comfortable and pleasant trip, punctual and friendly, highly recommended. Drops you off wherever you want, not like those arseholes who drop you miles away from anywhere.

REV17 La mejor experiencia de mi vida en Blablacar, chica súper simpática, me dejo con mi mejor amiga al lado de mi casa para tomarla, pone la música que quieras y hasta te deja cantar dentro del coche, volvería a repetir 1 y mil veces más, la recomiendo 100% PD: la acompañante también eera la hostia, i love Manolo Bakes. The best experience I’ve ever had with Blablacar, really friendly girl, she left me with my best friend right next to where I live to get her, she puts on any music you want and even lets you sing in the car, I would repeat the experience a thousand and one times, I recommend her 100%. PS, the other companion was also awesome, i love Manolo Bakes.

As we can see in Table 4, the meanings of this group of reviews are not just unequivocal accounts of the experience; in fact, other readers’ understanding of the message may be fragmented. Indeed, the importance of the message does not reside so much in what is said, but in what is implied. To give an example, “siento lo de tu chaqueta jaja” (‘sorry about your jacket, haha’) in REV14, shows that something happened during the offline encounter, which is anecdotical and, perhaps, entertaining. Including this message in the review means that the message is no longer addressed to the audience, and creates the implicature that what matters is their positive relationship, and that the journey was not just a journey, but also a relational experience. Their affiliative, informal style (e.g., the emoticon, onomatopeic laughing), together with the apology, implies that the function of this review is precisely to enhance their relational identity through a process of adequation. Furthermore, the importance given to foregrounding their sense of group membership is seen in most of the reviews of this type. Thus, “él y yo nos bastamos” (‘he and I had all we needed with each other’) in REV11 points to the close relationship they both had, and how much they enjoyed each other’s company. The language choices and style in REV12 reveal this sense of connectedness, mainly because of colloquial vocabulary (“tio” ‘dude’, “mazo” ‘awesome’), spelling resembling orality (“weno” ‘choonz’) and onomatopeias (“bua” ‘whoa’), as if they still were together, but also because they share and enjoy the same music styles. This importance given to ‘sharing’ is also seen in REV17 (‘I love Manolo Blakes’). Therefore, adequation with the addressee is not only a matter of sameness, but also a matter of having fun during the journey. REV13 points to the same type of implicatures with the term “cuadrilla” (‘gang’, referring to group membership), but also by showing their expectations of relational continuity (“nos vemos el próximo año” ‘see you next year’), also reflected in REV15 (“en dos viajes más…” ‘in a couple more trips’). In short, processes of adequation and interest in strong ties are reflected in their sense of sharing: sharing fun and music, as in REV12 and REV17; sharing the same colloquial or slang language, in REV11 (“siesas” ‘snooty’) and REV16 (“capullos” ‘arseholes’); sharing the perception of the past experience, as in REV11 (“nos bastamos” ‘he and I had all we needed’); and sharing potential experiences (“en dos viajes más arreglamos España” ‘in a couple more trips we’ll have put Spain to rights’).

In order to reinforce this desire to align with the addressee, users may also opt to highlight processes of distinction and illegitimization (Bucholtz and Hall 2005Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall 2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach”. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. ), as in REV11 and REV16. In both cases, users wanted to reinforce their relationship by differentiating and dismissing other identities. Thus, “Nos tocaron dos tías siesas y aburridas que se sentaron atrás y no dijeron ni mu en todo el viaje, pero él y yo nos bastamos” (‘There were two boring snooty girls who sat in the back and didn’t say a word for the whole journey, but he and I had all we needed with each other’, REV11), shows the extent to which “the others” are not like “us”. Likewise, REV16 says that “Te deja donde quieras, no como los típicos capullos que te dejan to lejos de cualquier sitio” (‘Drops you off wherever you want, not like those arseholes who drop you miles away from anywhere’) reinforces a similar process of illegitimization, in which the attitudes of others are questionable. All in all, by addressing the driver both explicitly and implicitly, talking about shared anecdotes and shared knowledge or tastes, and highlighting their sense of sameness in both form and content, they are pointing to connectedness, the search for fun, group membership, and expectations of continuity, in contrast to others (distinction, illegitimization), who did not understand or behave in a way deemed to be worthy of being part of the same group.

7.Discussion: Millennial identity and their discursive self in reviews

Overall, the identities-in-interaction that emerge in the data set, based on the examination of labels and users’ hints, reveal potential previous complex processes of translocality, on the one hand (i.e., the offline, local experience has an impact on the virtual communication process), and transmediality, on the other (i.e., BlaBlaCar users not only communicate via their platform, but also via other mobile apps and social media, not to mention their offline communication). In this process, therefore, other readers cannot have full access to all the information provided in reviews but can clearly infer that there was a positive experience and that a relatively close relationship developed between driver and passenger. This, no doubt, will be the best advertising campaign for drivers and passengers to have their positive reputation enhanced. In this sense, we concur with previous studies (Bridges and Vásquez 2018Bridges, Judith, and Camilla Vásquez 2018 “If Nearly All Airbnb Reviews Are Positive, Does That Make Them Meaningless?” Current Issues in Tourism 21 (18): 2057–2075. ; Guyader 2018Guyader, Hugo 2018 “No One Rides for Free! Three Styles in Collaborative Consumption”. Journal of Services Marketing 32 (6): 692–714. ; Hernández-López 2019Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. ; Careddu and Motebello 2019, among many others), which demonstrated that sharing economy reviews are not only descriptive, but also relational, and that the sense of community is much stronger and stable than in pre-sharing economy sites. Moreover, the thematic, linguistic, and stylistic variation illustrated in the examples provided in this study calls for a revision of the definitions of OCRs and eWOM included in the introductory section of this paper. These reviews are no longer about products or experiences, but about people (and by people who cannot be anonymized); the main purpose need not be assessing or describing, but relating to others or enhancing a pre-existing relationship; and the type of information is much more difficult to systematize, as reviewers use the platform as a community, along similar lines with other social media. We are clearly in the era of social reviews (Hernández-López 2019Hernández-López, María de la O. 2019 “What Makes a Positive Experience? Offline/online Communication and Rapport Enhancement in Airbnb Positive Reviews”. Pragmatics and Society 10 (2): 179–206. ), and millennials are especially skilful in the virtual social arena.

Indeed, in today’s techno-centric, participatory culture, models of communication are in constant flux, and this situation becomes compounded when it comes to analysing the discursive practices of digital natives such as millennials. They seem to have found in social media and sharing economy platforms a perfect fit for their relational needs, the expression of shared beliefs, the recognition of reciprocal expectations, and construction of identities that revolve around their ego identification within their peers. In this sense, the identities-in-interaction analysed in this study seem to perfectly match Generation Y’s profile, as specified by sociologists and economists (see Figure 1): namely, the expression of individuality through originality in terms of content and style, their need for interaction and communication, and their mention of group membership; their hedonism, by trying to fit within the group and by optimizing self-and other-presentation online; expressiveness, even imitating orality; and shared lifestyle, with frequent mentions made of fun and entertainment during the offline experience.99.However, we are aware of the fact that other factors that fall beyond the scope of this study, such as gender, educational background or social class, may have influenced the content and style of these reviews.

8.Conclusions

This research set out to shed light on how labels are explicit ways of shaping drivers’ individual identities, while relational and phatic messages addressed to drivers carry invoked meanings that reveal their sense of sharing (experiences, values, feelings), intragroup affiliation, and similarities in terms of lifestyle among peers. In this sense, BlaBlaCar represents a community of users who are not only interested in carpooling literally, but also in terms of relatedness, fun, ego-identification, and having a full experience in which their relational identity is central.

Given the complexity of ‘identity work’ as emergent in online discourse (multiplicity, context-sensitivity, relationality, temporality, translocality, transmodality, and virtual-physical congruence), covering all the ways in which identity is manifested in discourse is difficult, if not impossible, in one single study. In this sense, further studies are needed in order to do the concept full justice. Also, the data set was only in Spanish. A niche area of study that is still unexplored is the examination of potential cross-cultural and/or intercultural discursive practices and identity in peer-to-peer reviews. Finally, exploring other age groups, as well as gender differences, might provide further insight into the study of social reviews. In this sense, this study sought to provide a starting point for a potentially fruitful research path, so as to provide a fuller understanding of the complexities of virtual communication in a world in which ‘sharing’ shapes a new lifestyle which is undoubtedly here to stay.