Jemma Hunt

MDA20009 - Digital Communities

[102571508]

W:10 Online Harassment and Social Media Governance

The content this week focussed on digital citizenship and conflict, specifically social media governance. The reading was an article called ‘#NoSnowFlakes: The toleration of harassment and an emergent gender-related digital divide, in a UK student online culture’ written by Craig Haslop, Fiona O’Rourke and Rosalynd Southern in 2021. The article addressed the term ‘Snowflake generation’, a term that is specifically focussed on young people and is “used to mock their perceived intolerance and over-sensitivity” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p. 1418). The article “challenged the discourse” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p.1418) and challenged this idea with findings from their study they did with university students in the UK. They found these students see online harassment as a ‘norm’ and it’s an everyday experience for them, where “most students are willing to put up with it, rather than take action and address it” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p.1418). The findings completely challenge the idea that these students are a ‘snowflake generation’ and that is demonstrated throughout the article, using collected “survey and interview data” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p.1418) from the selected group of University students. 

The article defines online harassment as “threats or other offensive unwanted behaviours targeted directly at others through new technology channels” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p. 1420), this can be shown through many different forms across social media platforms, “such as spreading malicious rumours, sending abusive direct messages and the non-consensual sharing of personal context, including sexual images” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p. 1420). Studies have shown that “women are more likely to be targets of gendered-based online harassment than men” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p. 1420) and a “significant number of studies have indicated that online harassment can have a range of emotional, psychological and physiological effects on those subjected to these practices” (Haslop, O’Rourke, Southern, 2021, p. 1420). 

The “normalisation of misogyny and abuse online both reflects and reinforces systemic inequalities” (Suzor et al, 2019, p. 84) and there is a responsibility that comes with governing these global social media platforms. “Addressing gender-based violence online will require the intervention of the technology companies that govern the commercial internet to prevent and combat abuse across networks and services” (Suzor et al, 2019, p. 84), these companies should be ensuring that “they do not reproduce gendered inequality” (Suzor et al, 2019, p. 84) on their platforms.  

References: 

Haslop, C., O’Rourke, F., & Southern, R. (2021). NoSnowflakes: The toleration of harassment and an emergent gender-related digital divide, in a UK student online culture. Convergence (London, England), 27(5), 1418–1438. 

Suzor, N., Dragiewicz, M., Harris, B., Gillett, R., Burgess, J., & Van Geelen, T. (2019). Human Rights by Design: The Responsibilities of Social Media Platforms to Address Gender‐Based Violence Online. Policy and Internet, 11(1), 84–103. 

[102571508]

W9: Gaming

This week the focus was on Gaming communities and social gaming. These are aspects of the gaming industry that have gained significant popularity in recent years. Gaming communities refer to groups of people who share a common interest in gaming and come together to discuss and share their experiences with games. These communities can take many forms, from online forums and Discord servers to local meetups and conventions. Video-games are social, they have notions of community, digital citizenship and participatory culture, they are an active form of media. Social gaming involves playing games with other people, either in-person or online, and is often built around social interaction and communication. This can include cooperative gameplay, competitive multiplayer modes, and social features like chat rooms and friend lists. 

‘Social Games’ are an established genre of games, that revolve around social networking sites, particularly Facebook, they are “online games that adapt your friendship ties for plays purpose, while accommodating your daily routines” (Järvinen, 2011). The games are played online, utilising existing friend networks, and can be played anywhere and anytime and are targeted at people who don’t generally fit under the usual definition of a ‘gamer’. An example of a social game is ‘Words with Friends’, which is a multiplayer word game that is similar to scrabble, where people play against their friends or randomised opponents. Live-streaming on platforms like Twitch and YouTube have also created a gaming community around e-sports (electronic sports). 

This week’s reading by Brendan Keogh, “The Melbourne indie game scenes: value regimes in localised game development” examines the various value regimes that exist within the Melbourne indie game development scene. Keogh argues that these regimes are shaped by a variety of factors, including economic, cultural, and social factors, and that they have a profound impact on the way that games are created, marketed, and consumed. He starts off by introducing Melbourne International Games Week (MIGW), which is an annual event “that brings together a number of different events of varying shape and size related to aspects of the video-game field” (Keogh, 2021, p. 209). Throughout the chapter, Keogh discusses the local indie game scenes in Melbourne, the value regimes of indie development and talks about the “cultural, economic and technological space” (Keogh, 2021, p. 209) video-games have. 

References: 

Järvinen, A 2011, Week 8 Social Gaming Guest Lecture: 2023-HS1-MDA20009-Digital Communities 2023, Instructure.com https://swinburne.instructure.com/courses/33896/pages/week-8-social-gaming-guest-lecture?module_item_id=2145732

Keogh, B 2021, 'The Melbourne indie game scenes: value regimes in localized game development' (Chapter 13), 'The Melbourne indie game scenes: value regimes in localized game development' (Chapter 13),in P Ruffino (ed), Independent Videogames: Cultures, Networks, Techniques and Politics, Routledge, pp.209-222.

[102571508]

W8: Face Filters

This week the focus was on augmented filters on social media platforms, with the reading focussing specifically on Snapchat filters or lenses. The reading written by Jessica Barker in 2020, ‘Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat’ discussed how Snapchat, which was “originally praised as a space for authentic, unfiltered self-presentation, became a force for aggressively perpetuating fashionable but exclusionary beauty ideals” (Barker, 2020, p. 207) through the use of homogenous standard beauty and surgery filters, following Western beauty ideals. Snapchat, which has over “383 million daily active users worldwide” (Statista, 2023) introduced “lenses – commonly known as face filters – in 2015” (p. 207), they allow users to apply augmented reality (AR) filters to their selfies and videos. These filters use facial recognition technology to track a user's face and overlay digital effects and animations onto it in real-time. The filters “apply virtual accessories and modify facial features, enabling users to incorporate augmented reality into their daily sartorial practice and self-presentation” (Barker, 2020, p. 208), being able to have access to a technology that instantly changes people to change their appearance can have both positive and negative outcomes. Some positives that come from these face filters on social media platforms include, self-expression and exploring one’s self identify so accessibly, this can allow people to be more comfortable with themselves. They also create a space for fun and entertainment, with the less serious and more playful filters. However there are many negatives that come with face altering filters, including the fact they can “morph [people] into compliance with a stereotypical form of beauty” (Barker, 2020, p. 208) as filters generally are not inclusive and portray unrealistic “feminine beauty ideals” (Barker, 2020, p. 209) specifically. 

Filters have progressed majorly since when they were first introduced to now, “filters initially produced conspicuous, playful forms of editing” (Lavrence & Cambre, 2020, p.2) and these novel filters have shifted to a more “subtler ambient form of editing, where it is not always obvious, have been normalised” (Lavrence & Cambre, 2020, p.2). These ambient filters create ‘natural’ beauty and within this style of selfies it’s “presumed to be both ‘real’ and yet ‘not actual’” (Lavrence & Cambre, 2020, p.2) at the same time and “‘real’ in this context does not mean raw, but rather ‘filtered to look natural’” (Lavrence & Cambre, 2020, p.5), with subtle filtering that passes as ‘natural’. These filters are becoming more and more inescapable and advanced across most social media platforms. 

References: 

Barker, J. (2020). Making-up on mobile : The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat.

Dixon, S., & 2, M. (2023). Snapchat Daily Active Users 2023. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/545967/snapchat-app-dau/#:~:text=As%20of%20the%20first%20quarter,since%20the%20beginning%20of%202019

Lavrence, C., & Cambre, C. (2020). “Do I Look Like My Selfie?”: Filters and the Digital-Forensic Gaze. Social Media + Society, 6(4), 205630512095518–

[102571508]

W7: Body Modification and Visual Social Media

The rise of social media platforms has brought about significant changes, offering new opportunities for content creators to reach global audiences and monetise their work. However, critics have pointed to the exploitative and insecure nature of platform-dependent creative labour. Additionally, creators are struggling with algorithms that govern the visibility of their content, which can often prevent them for gaining views. There is a negative impact of these algorithms on social media creators, particularly those who come from historically marginalised groups, who don’t conform to the heteronormative notions or the pornified atheistic ideals that gain the most popularity with micro-celebrities across social media platforms, as conformance to heteronormative notions of attractiveness is how some women on social media present themselves (Drenten & Gurrieri, 2019). The set reading this week, ‘Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility’ by Brooke Erin Duffy and Colten Meisner, “draws upon in-depth interviews with 30 social media creators – sampled from historically marginalised identities and/or stigmatised content genres – to explore their perceptions of, and experiences with, algorithmic (in)visibility” (Duffy et al, 2023, pg. 285). The study examines the perceptions of algorithmic platform governance among 30 social media creators across platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitch. The creators' accounts suggest a shared understanding that platforms enact governance unevenly, and platform punishments are often seen as a consequence of social identities and/or politicised genres of content. The article highlights the critical need to understand social media creators' experiences with platform (in)visibility, given the influential role they have and how many brand’s rely on them to sell products. 

To establish a personal brand or become a microcelebrity on social media, individuals must conform to popular aesthetic templates that are often promoted through product campaigns. However, these templates are often associated with digital influencer brands that promote unrealistic and harmful body image standards. An example of this is Kylie Jenner’s swim brand, ‘Kylie Swim’, only representing heteronormative body ideals. 

References: 

Drenten, J.,Gurrieri, L.,Tyler, M 2019, Sexualized labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention In: Gender, Work and Organization, Gender, Work and Organization, pp. 1 – 26

Duffy, B. E., & Meisner, C. (2023). Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility. Media, Culture & Society, 45(2), 285–304. 

[102571508]

W6: The Slow Fashion Movement

The set reading this week was a literature review, ‘Slow fashion Consumer Behaviour’, written in 2022 by authors Mariana Domingos, Vera Teixeira Vale, and Silvia Faria. The slow fashion movement is a sustainable and ethical approach to fashion that emphasises quality over quantity and prioritises the use of environmentally friendly and socially responsible production practices. As defined by the authors, Slow Fashion “represents the need to adopt sustainable performance and a change in core values in the fashion industry” (Domingos et al, 2022, pp. 1). Although the Slow Fashion movement is something that many of us are seeing in recent years across social media, it’s a movement in which its core values have been around since the 1960’s, with the ‘Counterculture’ movement, sharing similar values including the rejection of fast-paced and disposable mainstream fashion and a desire for greater individual expression and authenticity. The slow fashion movement “encourages brands to embrace a quality-based rather than a time-based business philosophy based around slower production, ethical attitudes, and well-made and long-lasting products.” (Domingos et al, 2022, pp. 2), resulting in good quality products. 

In the reading, the authors compared a series of research papers on the topic of Slow fashion and then came to some understandings themselves. They ended up looking at 25 different relevant papers and the main theories from each were split up into 7 categories, sustainability, marketing, culture, fashion, human behaviour, methods and business (Domingos et al, 2022). The groups with the highest representation of theories were human behaviour and sustainability, when discussing slow fashion. A mind map was then made in order to understand how consumers perceive slow fashion. From the research, the mind map focussed on key concepts associated with slow fashion: ethical values, sustainable consumption, consumer motivations, consumer attitudes, and awareness of sustainability (Domingos et al, 2022).

Social media influencers who are successful play a significant role in social movements, such as the slow fashion movement, by facilitating conversations within digital communities and sharing their knowledge and tips to those who follow and interact with their content. 

There are many trends on social media platforms like TikTok, which gain lots of views and give inspiration to people, to think more ethically when buying clothes. Some of these include, Thrift with me and Thrifting Haul videos, encouraging people to be more environmentally sustainable, by purchasing second-hand items. There are creators making videos about upcycling and even doing challenges like Flipping Feb, where they take an item of clothing, they are currently not happy with and flip it into something they would wear, which means they are not just throwing away old clothes, which then minimises the amount of waste that ends up in landfills. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports “that Americans produce averagely 16 million tons of textile and apparel waste every year, of which only 15% was recycled” (Chi et al, 2021, pp. 102), so content surrounding the slow fashion movement can be very influential and educational to those who don’t know much about the social issue.

References: 

Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., & Wang, Y. (2021). A study of U.S. consumers’ intention to purchase slow fashion apparel: understanding the key determinants. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 14(1), 101–112

Domingos, M., Vale, V. T., & Faria, S. (2022). Slow Fashion Consumer Behaviour: A Literature Review. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 14(5), 2860  

[102571508]

W5: What is Digital Citizenship?

Digital Citizenship refers to the responsible and ethical use of technology, by individuals and communities. Being a good digital citizen means positively using the internet, having respectful interactions with others online and avoiding negative behaviours, practices and expressions, one example being cyberbullying on social media platforms. 

The set reading by Choi and Cristol, “Digital citizenship with intersectionality lens” 2021, argues that digital citizenship education should include an intersectional lens to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their intersecting differences, have equal access and agency, across the digital world. The recent “BLM (Black Lives Matter) movement and the Covid-19 pandemic, demonstrates the need to recognise how people differently experience social inequities” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 361), based on their own social identity attributes. Intersectionality, being a lens that “brings attention to the distribution of power in society” (Kapilashrami, 2020, pp. 4) and recognises how different forms of discrimination, oppression and privilege intersect and interact with one another, is a “key framework to understand the current social issues and online activities deeply and critically” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 362). 

The article argues the primary goal being “participatory democracy” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 362), through digital citizenship education. The three different approaches to digital citizenship that are referenced in the article are, the “unidimensional approach” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 362), focussing specifically on online safety and security. The “multidimensional approach” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 363), aiming to develop a more comprehensive understanding on not just online safety but also “digital ethics, media and information literacy” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 363). Lastly, a “critical and radical approach” (Choi et al, 2021, pp. 363), goes beyond the first two approaches and actually questions what the underlying structures are that shape technology use. 

References:

Choi, M., & Cristol, D. (2021). Digital citizenship with intersectionality lens: Towards participatory democracy driven digital citizenship education. Theory into Practice, 60(4)

Kapilashrami, A. (2020). What is intersectionality and what promise does it hold for advancing a rights-based sexual and reproductive health agenda? BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health, 46(1), 4–7. 

[102571508]

W4: Digital Community and Fandom: Reality TV

Reality television has become increasingly popular over the past few decades, being a staple television genre worldwide. Many reality TV shows have found their fame through the use of social media and online digital publics as “reality television is a genre that is designed to elicit talk and shared opinions” (Deller, 2019, pp. 153), resulting in a place “for online communities to form” (Deller, 2019, pp. 154). Social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook, create a “participatory culture” (Deller, 2019, pp. 153), a space for people to come together and discuss their opinions, or for Twitter’s case, a place where people can “tweet along with the programme” (Deller, 2019, pp. 155) sharing their live reactions, feelings and thoughts, with other people watching at the same time, creating a sense of “liveness” (Deller, 2019, pp. 155). Social media is a major factor of audience engagement with reality tv shoes, “whether in structurally organised ways like Facebook groups, or through more loose aggregations such as people following a hashtag on Twitter” (Deller, 2019, pp. 154), viewers are continuing conversation online and collaborating with one and other. One of the main ways that reality TV has influenced social media is through the use of hashtags. These hashtags can help to create a sense of community among fans of the show and can also help to drive engagement and increase the show’s visibility, hopefully resulting in more viewers. 

A report prepared for the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) at the end of 2021, recorded viewer responses to reality television specifically in Australia. One section of the report discussed social media and online continued engagement, stating that “almost one-third [30%] of current viewers who specified watching a particular program had engaged with program-related content via social media” (ACMA, 2021) to further and “extend their viewing pleasure” (ACMA, 2021). 

Viewers of reality tv shows are using social media for “follow up engagement (ACMA, 2021) and contribute to a community. Social media platforms and reality TV have come together to create a sense of community and “unite society” as argued by Deller (2019, pp.155). 

References: 

Deller, R. A. (2019). Reality Television in an Age of Social Media. In Reality Television: The Television Phenomenon That Changed the World (pp. 141–175). Emerald Publishing Limited. 

ACMA (2021) Report: Viewer response to reality television in Australia - ACMA. Available at: https://www.acma.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/Viewer%20response%20to%20reality%20television%20in%20Australia_ACMA%20commissioned%20research.pdf. 

[102571508]

W3: Tumblr and the #BodyPositive Movement

“Love the Skin You’re In” written by Anne Reif, Insa Miller and Monika Taddicken, analyses how women use feminist hashtags online, specifically the #BodyPositive hashtag on the social media platform Tumblr “a micro blogging site that launched in 2007” (Keller, 2019, pp. 7), to accept and celebrate their bodies. The movement “aims to reconnect people with their own body image” (Reif et al, 2022, pp. 2), while challenging harmful social norms. 

However, just like majority of content and movements featured predominately on social media platforms, it is difficult to filter out the negative responses that present themselves, from trolls and cyberbullies that take hold of the hashtag and drive it to a problematic angle. Although Tumblr may be a safe space for a lot of people to be who they want to be, “setting the pre-conditions for a diverse and empowering feminist community” (Reif et al, 2022, pp. 6) the social media platform “allowed NSFW [Not Safe For Work] content without restrictions until 2018” (Reif et al, 2022, pp. 2), highlighting the harmful risk of presenting yourself online. 

Nevertheless, the Tumblr community helped the #BodyPositive movement majorly, as the anonymous aspect of Tumblr, gave people a sense of “social privacy” (Keller, 2019, pp. 8), feeling like they could express themselves and their views in an honest way. Tumblr is referred to by many as a “black hole” (Keller, 2019, pp. 7), and when searching the #BodyPositive hashtag, you are instantly presented with endless amounts of content supporting women who don’t conventionally fit into “Western mass media’s” (Reif et al, 2022, pp. 1) definition of female beauty. The use of the hashtag on Tumblr, created a “self-empowering community” (Reif et al, 2022, pp. 2) full of women whose beauty standards shifted, from wanting to be something else, to loving themselves. 

References: 

Keller, J. (2019). “Oh, She’s a Tumblr Feminist”: Exploring the Platform Vernacular of Girls’ Social Media Feminisms. Social Media + Society, 5(3), 205630511986744–. 

Reif, A., Miller, I., & Taddicken, M. (2022). “Love the Skin You’re In”: An Analysis of Women’s Self-Presentation and User Reactions to Selfies Using the Tumblr Hashtag #bodypositive. Mass Communication & Society, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–24.