Untitled @aidannothere - Tumblr Blog

The Power of the Crowd: Redefining Crisis Communication in the Digital Age

When disaster strikes, traditional top-down communication structures are often pushed to their limits. However, the rise of digital platform environments has facilitated a massive paradigm shift: the emergence of crowdsourcing as a force multiplier in emergency response and mutual aid. From mapping environmental hazards to deploying grassroots manufacturing, "the crowd" is transforming from passive media consumers into active crisis co-responders.

Harnessing Platform Affordances for Disaster Relief

The true value of crisis crowdsourcing lies in its ability to virtually organize individuals across the globe to solve highly complex problems in real time (Riccardi, 2016). For example, during the catastrophic 2010 Haiti earthquake, platforms like Mission 4636 harnessed SMS infrastructure to allow thousands of international volunteers to translate, map, and process over 80,000 urgent aid messages, routing them directly to active responders on the ground (Riccardi, 2016).

Similarly, global digital networks like CrisisCommons demonstrate how open-source collaboration connects people, data, and technical tools to innovate rapidly when legacy systems fail (CrisisCommons, 2024). Rather than relying solely on official channels, these decentralized networks create agile, citizen-led public spheres dedicated to public safety.

The Dynamics of Mutual Aid and Rapid Prototyping

Beyond data mapping, the evolution of digital communities has catalyzed tangible material support through grassroots manufacturing. A prime example is the "Whistle Resistance" movement, where distributed groups utilized network connectivity to coordinate the 3D-printing of safety whistles at scale to secure and protect vulnerable communities (iRevolutions, 2026). This highlights how modern mutual aid moves seamlessly between digital coordination and physical community protection.

The Critical Challenges: Control vs. Verification

While the speed and cost-benefit ratio of utilizing existing user hardware are incredibly high, crisis crowdsourcing introduces serious systemic friction regarding data verification (Riccardi, 2016). Emergency operations centers are frequently strained by well-meaning but unverified or outdated information circulating on social networks, such as unvetted aerial damage photos or unconfirmed rescue requests (Riccardi, 2016).

Because disaster managers cannot afford to make operational commitments based on unvetted intelligence, the integration of crowdsourced data demands a heavy investment in digital volunteer infrastructure—such as "virtual warehouses" of vetted analysts—to filter, verify, and validate incoming user data before resources are dispatched (Riccardi, 2016).

Ultimately, crowdsourcing bridges the gap between official institutions and the collective intelligence of the public, serving as a powerful reminder that in the network era, disaster response is a shared, democratic responsibility.

Reference:

CrisisCommons. (2024). CrisisCommons: Connecting people, tools & resources to support crisis response. https://crisiscommons.org/

iRevolutions. (2026). Welcome to the whistle resistance: How a ragtag group of people are 3D-printing whistles at scale to keep communities safe. https://irevolutions.org/

Riccardi, M. T. (2016). The power of crowdsourcing in disaster response operations. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 20, 123–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.11.001

At Solid Ground, we strive to help people overcome poverty by meeting their basic needs and nurturing their success. But we also acknowledge

Rapid prototyping explained: How companies use agile development to test faster, avoid errors and implement innovations efficiently.

Kontur and PDC are working towards making the world a safer, more disaster-resilient place using FME.

#mda20009 #communication #disaster #relief #mutual aid

Power, Digital Citizenship and the Fight Against Networked Harassment

When we talk about digital communities, it is incredibly easy to get swept up into a utopian vision of unproblematic inclusion. We love to frame the internet as this grand, democratic equalizer where everyone has a voice. But todays digital citizenship is not just about logging on and participating positively; it is fundamentally about power.

Power over resources, power over speech and power over who gets to occupy digital spaces without fear. When we look at social media governance and conflict, the illusion of a peaceful global village cracks wide open.

The Reality of Networked Harassment

Online harassment isn’t just a series of isolated incidents perpetrated by a few "bad apples" or lone internet trolls. As researchers Alice Marwick and Robyn Caplan (2018) points out, malicious behavior is frequently networked,meaning it is highly coordinated, organized and structurally targeted. Many of the aggressive tactics we see weaponized today, such as doxing, social shaming and image based abuse, were systematically refined by anti-feminist groups during targeted online culture wars like Gamergate.

Furthermore, this hostility does not impact everyone equally. Cyberhate directly mirrors offline systemic prejudices, biases and structural oppression.

Gender-Related Digital Divide Research by Haslop, O’Rourke, and Southern (2021) reveals that individuals who identify as female or transgender are disproportionately targeted by severe online harassment, creating an emergent digital divide where marginalized groups are actively driven out of public discourse.

The Scale of Abuse A landmark study by Plan International (2020) surveying 14,000 girls across 31 countries found that a staggering 59% had been targeted with abusive and insulting language online.

Media Hostility Even in professional spheres, the abuse is heavily gendered and racialized. An analysis of 70 million comment threads by The Guardian found that out of the top ten regular writers who received the most abuse, eight were women and two were men of color.

This toxicity is further fueled by the rise of the "manosphere" and figures like Andrew Tate, whose algorithmic appeal leverages the anxieties of isolated young men, pulling them into radicalized anti-feminist echo chambers (Rich & Bujalkagence, 2023).

Navigating Social Media Governance: What Can Be Done?

If digital spaces are battlegrounds for power, how do we govern them? Social media governance operates on both a macro level (state legislation) and a micro level (platform terms of service and subreddit/forum moderation).

For a long time, legal remedies were fragmented. However, policy is slowly catching up to digital realities. For instance, Australia’s Online Safety Act 2021 (passed in 2022) marked a massive shift, allowing the eSafety Commissioner to legally compel online service providers to remove seriously harmful content or image-based abuse within 24 hours of a formal notice.

But we cannot rely on the law alone. True digital citizenship requires a multi-pronged approach to resistance:

Humour and Creative Subversion Women are increasingly reclaiming agency by using humor and art to expose their harassers. For example, Vitis and Gilmour (2017) highlight how women use Instagram to put "dick pics on blast," turning unsolicited sexual harassment into a tool for public accountability and artistic resistance.

Platform Pressure & Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) A Pew research study found that 79% of people believe social media giants are doing a poor or mediocre job at addressing cyberbullying. Advocacy groups are forcing brands to recognize their CSR obligations. If a brand works with influencers, they have a responsibility to shield those creators from coordinated trolling campaigns, offering structural and emotional support.

Reference:

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 the International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies, 27(5), 1418–1438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856521989270

Marwick, A. E., & Caplan, R. (2018). Drinking male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1450568

Rich, B., & Bujalka, E. (2023). The draw of the ‘manosphere’: understanding Andrew Tate’s appeal to lost men. The Draw of the ‘Manosphere’: Understanding Andrew Tate’s Appeal to Lost Men. https://doi.org/10.64628/aa.u9hk3sscv

State of the World’s Girls 2020: Free to be Online? - Plan International. (2023, July 14). Plan International. https://plan-international.org/publications/free-to-be-online/

Vitis, L., & Gilmour, F. (2016). Dick pics on blast: A woman’s resistance to online sexual harassment using humour, art and Instagram. Crime Media Culture an International Journal, 13(3), 335–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659016652445

Stay up-to-date with the latest news from Wesley College, stories from the College community and media releases. Read now: Three ways to dea

Having just passed a world-first social media ban for under 16s, we take a look at some of the key online safety legislation in Australia.

#online #socialmedia #governance #manosphere #mda20009

Rethinking "Play": How Platforms and Communities are Rewriting the Rules of Gaming

What does it actually mean to "play" a game nowaday? If we look back at it's classic definitions, Bernard Suits (1978) famously wrote that playing a game is the "voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles". But if you open Twitch, browse a dedicated subreddit or check out a community-run wiki, it becomes immediately clear that modern gaming isn't just about a player battling against a set of programmed rules. Today, gaming is an intricate ecosystem where culture, communities and digital platforms collide.

The Rise of "Knowledge Communites"

Gaming communities are no longer just groups of people who happen to like the same title; they have evolved into what Henry Jenkins (2006) terms knowledge communities. These are voluntary, tactical affiliations where members are held together by the mutual production and exchange of information.

Whether it is thousands of players collaboratively updating the official Stardew Valley wiki or users debating strategies on Steam forums and Reddit, the contemporary player is an active producer of knowledge. Play extends far beyond the console; it happens in the shared digital spaces where we collectively untangle game worlds.

The Platformisation of the Gaming Industry

We can't talk about modern gaming without talking about platformisation—the way digital platforms host, monetize, and actively shape how games are developed and distributed. As highlighted by Chia et al. (2020), platformisation has fundamentally altered the political economy of game development.

Developers no longer just sell a physical cartridge; they navigate the sprawling multi-sided marketplaces (like Steam, the App Store or Epic Games) that dictate visibility, enforce specific economic models and dictate how communities interact with creators.

Broadcasters and Spectators: Play as Perfromance

Perhaps the biggest cultural shift is that gaming has become deeply spectatorial. As T.L. Taylor (2018) explores in Watch Me Play, live-streaming platforms like Twitch have transformed gaming from a private, domestic hobby into a highly public, broadcasted performance. Streamers don't just showcase gameplay; they build complex social assemblages where live chat, community inside-jokes and real-time interactions turn spectatorship into a unique form of participatory culture.

Reference:

Chia, Keogh, Leorke, & Nicoll. (2020, June 2). Platformisation in game development. Internet Policy Review. https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/platformisation-game-development

Hjorth, L., Richardson, I., Davies, H., & Balmford, W. (2021). Exploring Minecraft: Ethnographies of Play and Creativity. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59908-9

Jenkins, H. (2006). Fans, bloggers, and gamers: Exploring participatory culture. nyu Press. https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jj2eKl3NcBEC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=henry+jenkins+2006&ots=nchd5BNLFP&sig=_clrwgjhYseb4lSk3iDkWx9XDe0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=henry%20jenkins%202006&f=false

Keogh, B. (2020). The Melbourne indie game scenes. In The Melbourne indie game scenes: Value regimes in localized game development (pp. 209–222). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367336219-18

Suits, B. (2014). The grasshopper-: games, life and utopia. Broadview Press. https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xG9WAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=bernard+suits+1978&ots=ZHP0O2Dj6e&sig=nkcfcwwb1oQrdRoJCyU6J3t2hfs&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=bernard%20suits%201978&f=false

Taylor, T. L. (2018). Watch Me Play : Twitch and the rise of game live streaming. Princeton University Press - Torrossa. https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/5622342

So in summary, a Community of Practice (CoP) is when a group of people (normally a subject matter expert) or even a passionate advocate come

The platformisation of the games industry is posing some serious challenges for Europe and the internet at large.

#mda20009 #twitch #gaming #knowledge #wiki

BEYOND THE SURFACE: HOW AR FILTER ARE REWIRING OUR FACES AND MINDS

From the silly dog ears on Snapchat to those subtler "ambient" beauty edits on Instagram that give you smooth skin and plumper lips, AR filters have completely altered how we view ourselves.

But have you ever paused to look past the screen? There is a massive academic debate happening right now about what these filters are actually doing to our culture, our self-esteem and even our relationship with technology. Behind the tech mask, the rise of "digitized dysmorphia" and how our selfies are training corporate algorithms.

The Filter illusion: Adding vs. Removing

When we think of a physical filter, like a coffee filter, we usually think of it as something that removes the unwanted junk. But digital filters flip this concept on its head. As media scholar Jill Walker Rettberg (2017) points out in her book chapter Filtered Reality, digital filters actually add "flavors" (like data, graphics and synthetic aesthetic layers) while simultaneously blocking out our physical "imperfections".

What happens when we spend more time looking at the "flavored" version of ourselves than our actual faces? It completely shifts our perception of reality.

From "Ugly Play" to the Social Media Beauty Pagent

Remember the early days of Snapchat? It used to be an momentary, a fun playground where you are felt completely comfortable sending your best friends the most ugliest, the most contorted selfies with funny captions. It felt authentic.

However, researcher Jessica Barker (2020) argues that the introduction of face-altering filters changed everything. Snapchat went from an authentic playground to an inescapable, hyper-regulated "beauty pageant". These filters often enforce a very specific, rigid and "hetero-sexy" ideals of Western femininity. It has become almost impossible to look genuinely "ugly" or silly on these platforms because the underlying algorithms are constantly working to "correct" your bone structure, skin texture and eye size to fit a specific commercial mold.

Digitized Dysmorphia & The "Instagram Face"

This constant digital tweaking has triggered what scholar Isabelle Coy-Dibley (2016) terms "Digitized Dysmorphia". In her piece “Digitised Dysmorphia” of the Female Body, she explains that we are no longer just critiquing our physical bodies in bathroom mirrors. Instead, we are using ubiquitous smartphone apps to virtually modify what we dislike in real-time, creating a "perfect" digital self to match rigid societal pressures.

This has given rise to the homogenous, ethnically ambiguous aesthetic known as "Instagram Face." Because users are constantly looking at a hyper-edited version of themselves, a deeply unsettling psychological loop occurs. Instead of bringing photos of celebrities to plastic surgeons, people are now showing up to consultations with heavily filtered selfies of themselves, demanding surgeries to emulate their own AR filters—a phenomenon colloquially known as "Snapchat dysmorphia."

You Aren't Just Posting a Selfie - You're Traning a Machine

Here is the wildest part of the research that most people completely overlook. When you swipe through Snapchat or Instagram lenses, you think you're just playing with a toy. In reality, you are acting as a data source.

In her fascinating chapter Biometric Citizens: Adapting Our Selfies to Machine Vision, Rettberg (2017) explains that AR filters require our faces to be mapped onto precise, 3D technical grids. Every time you open a filter, your face is broken down into machine-readable data strings of 1s and 0s.

"When we post selfies online, our audience will not only be other humans. Our audience is also, and perhaps primarily, machines." — Jill Walker Rettberg (2017)

By playing with these filters, we are actively participating in our own biometric surveillance. We are normalizing facial recognition technology and voluntarily training corporate AI algorithms to read, track, and categorize human emotion and geometry.

Reference:

Barker, J. (2020). Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat. Fashion Style & Popular Culture, 7(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1386/fspc_00015_1

Coy-Dibley, I. (2016). “Digitized Dysmorphia” of the female body: the re/disfigurement of the image. Palgrave Communications, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.40

Rettberg, J. W. (2014). Filtered reality. In Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks (pp. 20–32). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137476661_2

Rettberg, J. W. (2017). Biometric Citizens: Adapting Our Selfies to Machine Vision. In Biometric Citizens: Adapting Our Selfies to Machine Vision (pp. 89–96). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45270-8_10

How beauty filters influence self-image, perception, and identity in digital environments.

The term ‘ Instagram Face ’ has been around since 2019, when makeup gurus were very popular on YouTube and helped promote this image. I

#mda20009 #AR #snapchat #instagram #filter

The Digital Playground: Algorithmic Templates, Sex Work Aesthetics and the Plastic Reality of Social Media

Have you ever scrolled throught your instagrem feed and felt a strange sense of déjà vu? It's not just you. From perfectly sculpted jawlines and impossible tiny waists to the synchronized athletic poses of fitness influencers; our feeds have become a assembly lines for a highly specific, standardized version of "hotness".

Welcome to the world of aesthetic templates - where the standardized digital blueprints of physical appearance, posing and lifestyle dominates the visual on social media platforms like Instagram.

But behind the flawlessly filtered selfies lies a whole complex economy of unpaid labor, gendered expectations, systemic erasure and real world public health implications.

The Hustle for Visibility: Aesthetic and Sexualized Labor

In the digital attention economy, social media users function as prosumers - where we are simultaneously producing and consuming content. To gain traction, everyday users must engage in visibility labor, turning their identities into branded commodities.

This branding relies heavily on enacting aesthetic labor. Originally a concept used to describe how front facing employees must look, dress and act to represnt a company, aesthetic labor on social media has morphed into intense, continuous "body work". This work happens both online (via filters and digital alterations) and offline (via rigorous fitness regimes, makeup and cosmetic procedures).

For women, this template is deeply tied to pornification - where mainstream normalization of a "porn chic" aesthetic originally designed for the heteronormative male gaze. Influencer marketing often demands that women present highly sexualized version of themsleves, accentuating their curves and features to secure the algorithmic visibility and monetize attention. (Carah & Dobson, 2016; Drenten et al., 2019) This intersection of self branding and physical exposure highlights how contemporaru digital success frequently requires a form of sexualized labor. (Drenten et al., 2019)

The Gender Divide: Hyper Ferminity vs. Dominant Masculinity

The Hyper Feminine Template: Characterized by surgically or digitally enchanced features - fuller lips, difined jawlines, high cheekbones, snatched waists and prominent buttocks.

The Masculine Template: Centers on physical dominance, strength and athleticism. While male influencers are increasing adopting cosmetic alterations (like jawlines fillers), their presentations of self remain rooted in active displays of power rather than passive sexual objectification.

Marginalized Identities and Algorithmic Invisibility

This strict binary creates a hostile environment for marginalized creators. Research shows that gay men who adopt provocative, expressive or fluid poses often find their reach constrained. Because mainstream platforms favor content that is "palatable" the the mass heteronormative consumer base, marginalized groups face systemic marginalization.

As Duffy and Meisner (2022) points out, stigmatized communities such as tranegender or queer creators frequently engage in self censorship to avoid platforms shadowban and combat algorithmic invisibility. The digital landscape reinforces corporate and heteronormative advertising models, pushing alternatives identities to the fringes.

From Feed to Plastic: The Public Health Crisis

The psychological and physical ramifications of this digital feedback loop are severe. Social media acts as an unrehulated public health space where influencers advertise unachievable and uncharacteristic body ideals and image.

The profound disconnect between an individual's curated, filtered online persona and their actual physical self creates identity dissonance. To manage this tension, users engage in intensive "fame labor", which unconsequenly fuels deep body dissatisfaction.

This ongoing psychological distress is linked to the rise Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) among youth. When digital perfection starts becomes the baseline expectation, it starts to triggers severe cosmetic-seeking behaviors. Worryingly, independent research demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of plastic surgery hashtags and content on Instagram are used for marketing and self-promotion rather than medical education (Dorfman et al., 2018).

Reference:

Carah, N., & Dobson, A. (2016). Algorithmic hotness: young women’s “Promotion” and “Reconnaissance” work via social media body images. Social Media + Society, 2(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116672885

Dorfman, R. G., Vaca, E. E., Mahmood, E., Fine, N. A., & Schierle, C. F. (2018). Plastic surgery-related hashtag utilization on Instagram: implications for education and marketing. Aesthetic surgery journal, 38(3), 332-338. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjx120

Drenten, J., Gurrieri, L., & Tyler, M. (2020). Sexualized labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention. Gender, Work & Organization, 27(1), 41-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12354

Duffy, B. E., & Meisner, C. (2022). Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility. Media Culture & Society, 45(2), 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221111923

https://digitalmediamanagement.com/work/the-hustle/

Pastels, pinks and the revolution.

Redefining Masculinity

#MDA20009 #filter #plasticsurgery

Deconstructing the "Insta-Body": Algorithmic Hotness, Digital Labour and the Social Media Health Crisis

In the era of visual social media, our digital identities are far from organic. Creating a presence on platforms like Instagram frequently demands that users adhere to commercialized "aesthetic templates" - specific configurations of poses, accessories, props or physical body work designed to maximize platform visibility. This phenomenon is deeply embedded within microcelebrity culture, where online performances focus on constructing and maintaining a highly curated self that resembles a branded commercial good to achieve digital status.

However, this branding process operates as a deeply entrenched "dynamic loop" between user data and machine algorithms. As independent research by Carah and Dobson (2016) demonstrates, young women are required to engage in intensive "promotion" and "reconnaissance" work through social media body images. They must continuously evaluate and adapt their appearances to align with codes of "algorithmic hotness". User produce content that actively shapes corporate branding conventions, while their personal identity practices are simultaneously molded by the algorithmic mechanisms they help train.

The High Cost of Visibility: Aesthetic, Sexualized and Visibility Labour

Surviving within the attention economy has transformed internet participation into a site of intensive, continuous work. Social media platforms frame self-branding as an essential requirement for digital participation. This dynamic forces individuals into "visibility labour" - unpaid personal marketing efforts to compete for influence and platform status. A core component of this visibility strategy is aesthetic labour, where individuals purposefully modify their bodies or enact highly specific physical styles for comeercial or social benefit.

Increasingly, this work manifests as sexualized labour. Cnforming to narrow, heteronormative standards of attractiveness has become a priomary method for creators to secure algorithmic traction. Drawing upon the research of Drenten at al (2019), many successful influencers adopt a highly commercialized "porn chic" aesthetic or "pornification", which is strategiacally oriented towards a male-gaze audience.

Within this framework, female content creators consistenly position themselves as sexualized objects alongside the products they promote, choosing highly calculated poses that accentuate bodily curves and hyper feminized features like plump lips, defined jaw lines and enhanced buttocks. Lane(2016) builds upon this concept through a process based frameworkfor body modification, illustrating that altering physical form - whether digitally or surgically - is an ongoing social process driven by identity negotiations and cultures preassures.

Platform Governance and Algorithmic Invisibility

Crucially, the benefits of this visibility labor are fundamentally unequal, s platform economies disproportionately favor content that is plalatable to the mass consumer. Creators who push back against these boundaries or inhabit marginalized spaces experience severe systemic disadvantages. In their studies on platform governance, Duffy and Meiser(2022) expose how marginalized creators face profound "algorithmic invisibility". Stigmatized groups, such as transgender or queer content creators, face structural platform interventions that restrict their reach, forcing them to engage in constant self-censorship to circumvent shadowbans and algorithmic penalties. Furthermore, this heteronormative biuas extends to gendered templates; while mainstream visibility rewards women for hyper-feminine pornified poses, similar expressions by gay men can limit their mainstream algorithmic reach, reinforcing tranditional and patriarchal forms of heterosexual masculinity.

The Public health Fallout: From Dissonance to Cosmetic Surgery

The societal and psychological ramifications of these corporate driven aesthetic templates are driving a contemporary public health crysis. As users perform exhausting "fame labour" to bridge the gap between their real ives and their idealized difital personas, they encounter severe "identity dissonance". No matter how many filters are applied or procedures are performed, intense body dissatisfaction stems directly from the unachievable gap between online tmeplates and offline realities. Early psychiatric research directly links this identity dissonance to the development of Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD), where individuals become severely distressed over specific, hyper scrutinized facial or body features.

This psychological distress directly feeds into unregulated, commercialized cosmetic seeking behaviors. Independent research by Dorfman et al. (2018) discorved that plastic surgery related hasttags on Instagram are overwhelmingly utilized for corporate marketing and self promotion rather than medical education. This normalization is exacerbated across other video sharing platforms; Wen et al. (2015) conducted a content analysis of cosmetic surgery videos on YouTube and discovered that social media depictions minimize surgical risks, actively cultivationg highly positive behavioral intentions among viewers to seek out invasive makeovers. The severity of this social media fueled marketplace has prompted urgent government intervention, such as the Victorian Government (2019) public health campaigns targeting "dodgy cosmetic surgery" and tightening regulations around exploitative practitioners capitalising on social media trends.

Re-framing the Debate: Moving Beyond the Individual Re-framing the Debate: Moving Beyond the Individual

Ultimately, we must re-frame how we talk about body iamge. Body dissatisfaction continues to be trated as an individual psychological failing, but it is fundamentally a structural social problem manufactured by corporate platform mechanics. While social media holds immense potential for positive transformation - such as leveraging creative digital public health campaigns or fundamentally transforming medical care access in developing regions (Thompson, 2016) - its current visual commercial structure remians toxic. To build healthy digital communities, we must demand sharper regulatory oversight of influencer marketing, dismantle the rigid heteronormative templates built into platform algorithms and foster a critical consciousness regarding the digital labour we perform.

References

Carah, N., & Dobson, A. (2016). Algorithmic hotness: Young women’s “promotion” and “reconnaissance” work via social media body images. Social Media + Society, 2(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116672821

Dorfman, R. G., Vaca, E. E., Mahmood, E., Fine, N. A., & Schierle, C. F. (2018). Plastic surgery-related hashtag utilization on Instagram: Implications for education and marketing. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 38(3), 332–338. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjx223

Drenten, J., Gurrieri, L., & Tyler, M. (2019). Sexualized labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention. Gender, Work & Organization, 27(1), 41–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12354

Duffy, B. E., & Meisner, C. (2022). Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility. Media, Culture & Society, 44(7), 1318–1334. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221111923

Lane, D. C. (2016). Understanding body modification: A process-based framework. Sociology Compass, 10(9), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12495

Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. Yale University Press.https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xcrYAQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=Marwick,+A.+E.+(2013).+Status+update:+Celebrity,+publicity,+and+branding+in+the+social+media+age.+Yale+University+Press.&ots=G1p4TZ8_YQ&sig=ozZggb4Qlh8-VGwTX4l6WAoUlaM&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Phillips, K. A. (2009). Understanding body dysmorphic disorder: An essential guide. Oxford University Press. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375345074_Understanding_Body_Dysmorphic_Disorder_An_Essential_Guide

Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, consumption, prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’. Journal of Consumer Culture, 10(1), 13–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540509354673

Thompson, S. (2016). How social media is transforming medical care in the developing world. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/3057869/how-social-media-is-transforming-medical-care-in-the-developing-world

Victorian Government. (2019). Protecting Victorians from dodgy cosmetic surgery. Health Minister Media Release.

Wen, N., Chia, S. C., & Hao, X. (2015). What do social media say about makeovers? A content analysis of cosmetic surgery videos and viewers’ responses on YouTube. Health Communication, 30(9), 933–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2014.921271

Witz, A., Warhurst, C., & Nickson, D. (2003). The labour of aesthetics and the aesthetics of organization. Organization, 10(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508403010001004

Beyond the Virtual Scroll: Redefining Digital Citizenship in the Paltform Era

In today's digital age, the term "Digital Citizenship" is often deduced to the basic oinline safety or "netiquette". However, today's academic discussions reveals a much more complex reality than anticipated. Today Digital Citizenship is not just about avoiding trouble; it is about the competent and positive engagement with technology to participate actively in communities at the local, national and global levels. (Council of Europe, 2022) It is the digital extension of our traditional rights and responsibilities as memebers of a society.

The Shift to Ad-Hoc Activism One of the most significant shifts we are seeing today is how we engage politically. As Ariadne Vromen (2017) pointed out, traditional collective action - like joining a political party or a trade union - is on the decline in many advanced democraccies. In its place, we see the rise of Ad-Hoc involvement. Citizens are now more likey to engage with specific online social movements, environmental causes or human rights petitions. This is a sign of a move towards a more individualized, cause-driven form of political participation that flourishes in the digital spaces.

The Challenge of Platformisation However, our digital citizenship is increasingly shaped by "Platformisation". Platforms like X (formerlt know as Twitter), Instagram and even game development environments are not neutral. They are governed by algorithms and specific "affordances" - the features of a platform that encourage certain behaviors while discouraging others. Theocharies et al. (2023) argues that these affordances reshapes political engagement; the way a "Like" button or a "Share" function works can dictate the visibility of a political movement. Furthermore, when industiries like game development become"platformised", the labor and creativity of individuals are often constrained by the economic logic of the paltforms they inhabit. (Chia et al., 2020)

Toward a More Inclusive Future To truly foster a participatory democracy, we must look into at digital citizenship through an "intersectionality lens". As Choi and Cristolk (2021) suggest, digital citizenship education must account for how different indentities (race, gender and ckass) intersect and affect an individual's ability to participate online. Only by understanding these barriers can we move towards a digital public sphere that is truly inclusion and representive.

Ultimately, being a digital citizen is about more than just having an account; it's about navigating the tension between platform control and personal agency to contribute to the common good.

References

Chia, A., Keogh, B., Leorke, D., & Nicoll, B. (2020). Platformisation in game development. Internet Policy Review, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.4.1515

Choi, M., & Cristol, D. (2021). Digital citizenship with intersectionality lens: Towards participatory democracy driven digital citizenship education. Theory Into Practice, 60(4), 361-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2021.1987094

Council of Europe. (2022). Digital citizenship education handbook. Council of Europe Publishing.

Kim, Y., & Lee, S. (2022). #ShoutYourAbortion on Instagram: Exploring the visual representation of hashtag movement and the public’s responses. SAGE Open, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221093327

Mashable. (2018, March 6). #auspol: The Twitter tag that Australia can't do without. Mashable. https://mashable.com/2016/03/21/twitter-australia-auspol/

Theocharis, Y., Boulianne, S., Koc-Michalska, K., & Bimber, B. (2023). Platform affordances and political participation: How social media reshape political engagement. West European Politics, 46(4), 788-811. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2022.2087410

Vromen, A. (2017). Digital citizenship and political engagement: The challenge from online campaigning and advocacy organisations. Palgrave Macmillan.

The Reality of the TV Paradox & Why Digital Communities Matters

Have you ever found yourself consuming the latest episode of Married at First Sight or scrolling through a subreddit forum for The Real Housewives, only to tell your friends that you “don’t watch that fake show”! You are not alone here. And we will be exploring the Reality TV paradox.

While Reality TV consistently dominates viewer ratings – for instance, The Voice have garnered 2.4 million viewers alone in 2021 – but it is also frequently cited by its audience as the “most hated” or “bias” genre. But that’s what they want you to think as these shows are nothing but just “guilty pleasure” entertainment; but they are nothing but just a breeding ground for what scholars call the digital publics.

Beyond the Screen: Reality TV as a Political Trigger

Contrary to belief that reality tv is mindless, according to Graham and Hajru (2011) suggests that these shows acts as a “trigger” for the everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere. Where fans can debate on the controversial contestant on #MAFS (Married at First Sight), they aren’t just talking about the show itself; but are often engaging in critical discussion about sexism, gender roles and the articulate views on the matter of general interest, which is the very definition of a functioning public sphere. Tumblr: A Sanctuary for Marginalized Fandoms

While Facebook’s “default publicness” and the singular user identity can be dangerous or uncomfortable for many, hence Tumblr has emerged as a safer space for many gender-diverse self-representation. It helps empower voices that are otherwise marginalized, allowing them to build “their own kind of world” within fandom communities. The “Digital Money Shot” and Ambient Intimacy In today's media landscape, Reality TV stars are no longer just contestants but are digital laborers. Jacquelyn Arcy (2018) coined the term “the digital money shot” to describe how stars are incentivized to perform a more amplified, melodramatic version of their private lives on social media to generate “digital currency” in the forms of Instagram followers and sponsorships.

This creates a sense of ambient intimacy, where fans feel that they know these virtual strangers intimately. However, as Zhang (2022) notes, this collapse of boundaries has a dark side. When the line between celebrity and ordinary person starts to thin, audiences can become numb to the ramifications of their “barded comments”, leading to a culture of bullying and harassment. At the end of it, Reality TV serves as a mirror reflection of our digital society. It provides a sanctuary for community building, a platform for identity work and a trigger for civic engagement – all while highlighting the complexities of our increasingly blurry boundaries between public and private life.

Reference

Allison Maura Mccracken, Cho, A., Louisa Ellen Stein, & Indira Neill Hoch. (2020). A Tumblr book : platform and cultures. University Of Michigan Press. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/50926/9780472901296.pdf?sequence=1

Arcy, J. (2018). The digital money shot: Twitter wars, the real housewives, and transmedia storytelling. Celebrity Studies, 9(4), 487-502. https://aimimages.uwp.edu/aimimages/arcy/intellcont/Arcy%20The%20Digital%20Money%20Shot-1.pdf

Graham, T., & Hajru, A. (2011). Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere. European Journal of Communication, 26(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323110394858

Zhang, S. (2022). Assessing the engagement of reality show audiences: An analysis of audience responses in fan culture to Produce 101 China. University of Leeds.

Assessing the engagement of reality show audiences: An analysis of audience responses in fan culture to Produce 101 China.

#MDA20009 #reality tv

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Untitled