LiteraryYiXuan

Literally literary. Posts will be about Digital Communities and short essays of it!

[literaryyixuan]

Week 12 - Crowd sourcing in times of crisis

Digital citizenship has been explored through topics such as activism, social media influencers, gaming communities, and online governance. This week’s topic on crowdsourcing in times of crisis highlights another important aspect of digital citizenship: the ability of online communities to work together to support others during emergencies.

Crowdsourcing refers to the process of gathering information, resources, or assistance from large groups of people, often through digital platforms. According to Riccardi (2016), crowdsourcing has become an increasingly valuable tool in disaster response operations because it enables real-time information sharing between affected communities, volunteers, and emergency services. Rather than relying solely on official sources, individuals can contribute updates, report hazards, and help coordinate support efforts through digital technologies.

A case study relevant to crowdsourcing is the Australian Bushfire Crisis that occurred between 2019 and 2020. Throughout the disaster, social media platforms were used to share evacuation information, identify areas requiring assistance, and coordinate donations for affected communities. Organisations such as the Australian Red Cross utilised digital platforms to distribute emergency information, while community members contributed local updates and resources. This demonstrated how crowdsourcing can complement traditional emergency response systems by providing timely information from people directly experiencing the crisis.

With the help of crowdsourcing, it highlights the importance of participation, collaboration, and responsibility. During a crisis, individuals are not simply consumers of information, but active contributors to it. They can actively contribute to the wellbeing of their communities. However, this also creates challenges. Information shared online must be accurate and reliable, as misinformation can spread quickly during emergencies and potentially place people at greater risk.

This demonstrates one of the most positive applications of digital technology. While many discussions surrounding social media focus on conflict, misinformation, or harmful behaviour, this topic shows how digital platforms can also facilitate cooperation and collective problem-solving. The success of crowdsourcing initiatives depends not only on technology itself, but also on users who are willing to participate responsibly and contribute accurate information.

To end this post, this week’s topic of crowdsourcing reinforces the idea that digital citizenship extends beyond individual online behaviour. It also involves working collectively to support communities, particularly during times of crisis. Looking back across the posts I have published across the semester, digital citizenship has emerged as more than simply using technology responsibly. It involves understanding how digital platforms shape participation, identity, communities, and the ways people interact with one another online. Crowdsourcing in times of crisis demonstrates the positive impact that digital citizens can have when they work together towards a common goal.

References

Riccardi, M. (2016) ‘The power of crowdsourcing in disaster response operations’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 20, pp. 123–128.

[literaryyixuan]

Week 11 - Digital Citizenship and Conflict: Social Media Governance

Social media platforms are often celebrated for their ability to connect people, encourage participation, and provide spaces for self-expression. However, these same platforms can also become environments where harassment, discrimination, and online hostility occur. This week’s topic explores social media governance and considers how digital citizenship can help create safer and more inclusive online spaces.

One of the key challenges facing digital platforms today is balancing freedom of expression with the need to protect users from harmful behaviour. Online communities may sometimes normalise harassment and exclusion, creating environments where certain groups feel less welcome or less able to participate (Haslop, O’Rourke and Southern, 2021). This can contribute to digital divides, particularly when women and marginalised groups experience disproportionate levels of abuse online.

A relevant case study example in social media governance is the case of Andrew Tate. Mr. Tate gained a significant following across platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube through content discussing masculinity, success, and relationships. However, many of his comments attracted criticism for promoting misogynistic attitudes and harmful stereotypes about women. As a result, several major platforms removed or restricted his accounts due to concerns that his content violated community guidelines relating to hate speech and harmful behaviour.

The removal of Tate’s content sparked widespread debate regarding the responsibilities of social media companies. Supporters argued that banning his accounts limited freedom of expression, while critics maintained that platforms have a responsibility to protect users from content that may encourage harassment, discrimination, or harmful social attitudes. This case highlights the ongoing challenge faced by social media companies as they attempt to balance open discussion with the need to create safe and inclusive online environments.

This controversy also draws attention to the broader influence of the “manosphere", a collection of online communities that often discuss masculinity, gender roles, and relationships. While not all of these communities promote harmful views, researchers have identified concerns regarding misogyny, online hostility, and the normalisation of discriminatory attitudes. This demonstrates how digital platforms can amplify both positive and negative forms of participation, making effective governance increasingly important.

From a digital citizenship perspective, governance is not solely the responsibility of platform owners. Users also play a role in creating respectful online environments through their interactions and behaviour. Responsible digital citizenship involves recognising the impact that online actions can have on others and contributing to discussions in ways that encourage inclusion rather than hostility.

In my view, social media governance requires a balance between protecting freedom of expression and reducing harmful behaviour. While open discussion is an important aspect of digital participation, platforms also have a responsibility to ensure that users can engage without fear of harassment or abuse. Regulations such as Australia's Online Safety Act 2021 represent attempts to address these concerns, although debates continue regarding how much control platforms should exercise over user content.

Overall, this week's topic highlights that digital citizenship is not only about participation but also about responsibility and accountability. As social media continues to shape public discussion, effective governance will remain essential for creating safer and more inclusive digital communities.

References

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

Marwick, A.E. and Caplan, R. (2018) ‘Drinking male tears: Language, the manosphere, and networked harassment’, Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), pp. 543–559.

Rich, B. and Bujalkagence, E. (2023) ‘The draw of the “manosphere”: Understanding Andrew Tate’s appeal to lost men’, The Conversation, 13 February.Heath, M.K. (2018) ‘What kind of (digital) citizen? A between-studies analysis of research and teaching for democracy’, International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(5), pp. 342–356.

[literaryyixuan]

Week 10 - Gaming Communities, Social Gaming and Live Streaming

In recent times, online gaming spaces have become important environments where individuals communicate, collaborate, and build relationships. Platforms such as Twitch, Kick, and multiplayer co-op games have transformed gaming from a solitary activity into a highly social experience, creating digital communities that extend far beyond the games themselves.

One of the most significant developments in recent years has been the rise of live-streaming platforms such as Twitch, YouTube and Kick.

According to Taylor (2018), live streaming has changed gaming from a private experience into a public performance, where players not only play games but also interact with audiences in real time who tune in to watch their gameplay. Streamers build communities around shared interests, allowing viewers to participate through general chats, donations, and discussions. Twitch demonstrates how digital participation can create meaningful social connections between people from different backgrounds and locations.

Gaming communities can also encourage creativity and collaboration. Minecraft is a good example of this. Players can rent servers and play with friends in shared virtual spaces. These servers provide opportunities for players to collaborate, experiment, and express themselves through building projects and creative activities (Hjorth et al., 2021). Rather than simply consuming content, players actively contribute to the creation of virtual worlds and experiences. This reflects an important aspect of digital citizenship, where participation involves creating, sharing, and engaging with others in constructive ways.

Though there is also the other side of these gaming communities with issues such as online toxicity, harassment, and exclusion continue to exist within these spaces. Digital citizenship therefore becomes increasingly important, as players must learn to engage respectfully and responsibly with others online. While gaming communities can foster belonging and collaboration, they also require active efforts to maintain safe and inclusive environments.

A case study of this is of the Twitch Hate Raids that occurred around the start of 2021 where many twitch creators, particularly women, LGBTQ+ creators and creators of colour, were targeted by coordinated “hate raids”. These raids included spam messages, harassment targeted at streamers and spam bots that fill the chat with offensive messages and disruptive content. In order to combat this, creators relied on trusted community members to act as moderators and help manage chat activity during raids.

From my viewpoint, gaming communities highlight both the opportunities and challenges of digital participation. Platforms like Twitch and YouTube show show how digital technologies can bring people together through shared interests, while games like Minecraft demonstrate the creative potential of online collaboration. However, these spaces also remind us that positive communities do not happen automatically. They depend on users who are willing to contribute respectfully and support others.

To end this week’s topic, live-streaming platforms and gaming communities demonstrate that digital citizenship extends into all areas of online life, including entertainment. Beyond simply playing games, individuals are participating in digital cultures that shape communication, creativity, and community in the modern world.

Reference

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

Taylor, T.L. (2018) ‘Broadcasting ourselves’, in Watch Me Play: Twitch and the Rise of Game Live Streaming. Princeton University Press, pp. 1–23.

Hjorth, L., Richardson, I., Davies, H. and Balmford, W. (2021) ‘Exploring play’, in Exploring Minecraft: Ethnographies of Play and Creativity. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 27–47.

Chia, A., Keogh, B., Leorke, D. and Nicoll, B. (2020) ‘Platformisation in game development’, Internet Policy Review, 9(4).

[literaryyixuan]

Week 9 - Digital Citizenship & Software Literacy: Instagram Filters

Social media filters have become a normal part of online communication, particularly on visual platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok. Whether used for smoothing skin, enhancing facial features, or altering lighting, filters allow users to modify their appearance with just a few taps. While many people view these tools as harmless fun, this week’s topic highlights the importance of software literacy and understanding how these filters and image altering technologies influence the way we see ourselves and others online.

Software literacy refers to an individual’s ability to understand how digital tools and platform shape experiences, behaviours, and perceptions. Beauty filters are designed to promote idealised versions of appearance by subtly altering facial features to align with contemporary beauty standards (Barker, 2020). Features such as smoother skin, larger eyes, and slimmer facial structures may appear minor, but repeated exposure to these altered images can influence how users evaluate their own appearance.

A case study that is a real-world example of this topic is the rise of the “Instagram Face” aesthetic in the late 2010s. This style was popularised by celebrities such as Kim Kardashian and Kylie Jenner, who had the ideal beauty features of the time such as flawless skin, fuller lips, sculpted facial features and accentuated those features with heavily edited photographs (Grazie, S. 2023). Social media filters often replicate these characteristics, making them appear achievable through digital enhancement. As these images became increasingly visible online, many users began comparing themselves to digitally altered appearances rather than realistic representations of everyday people.

This idea is closely connected to Rettberg’s (2014) concept of “filtered reality”, which suggests that digital technologies do not simply represent reality but actively shape it. As users increasingly interact with filtered images, the line between authentic and digitally modified appearances can become blurred. In many cases, people are not comparing themselves to others online, but to edited versions of others that may not reflect reality at all.

One concern surrounding this phenomenon is “digitized dysmorphia” (Coy-Dibley, 2016). This occurs when digital editing tools contribute to dissatisfaction with one’s appearance by creating unrealistic expectations of how individuals should look. Social media users, particularly younger audiences, may feel pressure to achieve filtered appearances in real life, even though those standards are often digitally constructed.

This highlights the importance of critical awareness when engaging with online content. While filters can be creative and enjoyable tools, users should also understand how they influence our self-perception and beauty standards. Software literacy allows individuals to recognise that digital platforms are not neutral spaces and that many of the images they encounter have been altered through technology.

Filters are not to be blamed for these problems. The issue arises when users become unaware of how these technologies shape the users’ perception of reality. Developing software literacy helps individuals navigate social media more critically and make informed decisions about the content they create and consume. As visual platforms continue to evolve, understanding the role of digital tools will become an increasingly important part of digital citizenship.To finalize, Instagram and Snapchat filters demonstrate how technology can influence identity, self-image, and social expectations. This week’s topic shows that digital citizenship is not only about how we behave online, but also about understanding how digital technologies shape the way we view ourselves and the world around us.

References

Barker, J. (2020) ‘Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat’, Fashion, Style & Popular Culture, 7(2), pp. 207–221.

Coy-Dibley, I. (2016) ‘Digitised dysmorphia of the female body: The re/disfigurement of the image’, Palgrave Communications, 2(1), pp. 1–9.

Rettberg, J.W. (2014) Seeing ourselves through technology: How we use selfies, blogs and wearable devices to see and shape ourselves. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

[literaryyixuan]

Week 8 - Digital Citizenship & Health Education: Body Modification on Visual Social Media

Visual social media platforms have significantly changed the way people present themselves online. Platforms such as Instagram and TikTok place a strong emphasis on appearance, encouraging users to curate highly edited and visually appealing versions of themselves. As a result, conversations surrounding body modification, cosmetic enhancement, and online beauty standards have become increasingly common in digital culture.

A reason for this is partly due to the influence of celebrities and influencers, whose online portrayals of themselves often shape the public’s perceptions of beauty and attractiveness. Throughout the 2010s, many Western celebrities became associated with highly curated aesthetics that were widely replicated across social media. These appearances were frequently reinforced through filters, editing tools, and beauty trends that encouraged users to alter or carefully manage how they looked online. A well-known example is the #KylieJennerChallenge, where teenagers took it upon themselves to replicate Kylie Jenner’s lip look. Teens who tried this trend ended up with heavily bruised lips and even tearing.

From a digital citizen’s perspective, this raises important questions about responsibility and transparency online. Digital citizenship is not only about behaving respectfully online, but also understanding how published digital content can affect others. When heavily edited or unrealistic beauty standards dominate our curated “For You” pages, audiences may struggle to distinguish between authentic representation and constructed online identities. This is particularly significant for younger users, who are often highly engaged with visual platforms and influencer culture.

At the same time, social media has created a space for more positive discussions surrounding body image and self-acceptance. Movementspromoting authenticity, unfiltered content, and transparency around editing have gained visibility in recent years. Some creators now openly discuss the pressures of maintaining online appearances and encourage healthier conversations about beauty standards and digital wellbeing. It shows a growing awareness of how online environments can shape mental health and self-esteem.

From my perspective, digital citizenship in visual social media spaces requires greater awareness of how content influences audiences. Celebrities and influencers have a powerful role in shaping trends, but users also need to critically evaluate the media they consume instead of accepting online appearances as reality. While visual platforms can encourage creativity and self-expression, they also highlight the importance of media literacy and responsible participation online.

To conclude this week’s topic, the discussion surrounding body modification on social media demonstrates how digital citizenship extends beyond just communication and participation. It also involves understanding the social and emotional impact digital content can have on individuals and communities.

References

Fardouly, J. and Vartanian, L.R. (2016) ‘Social media and body image concerns: Current research and future directions’, Current Opinion in Psychology, 9, pp. 1–5.

Tiggemann, M. and Slater, A. (2013) ‘NetGirls: The Internet, Facebook, and body image concern in adolescent girls’, International Journal of Eating Disorders, 46(6), pp. 630–633.

Chae, J. (2017) ‘Explaining females’ envy toward social media influencers’, Media Psychology, 21(2), pp. 246–262.

Friger, J. (2015) '#KylieJennerChallenge causes big trouble', CBS News.

[literaryyixuan]

Week 7 - Influencers and Slow Fashion Case Study

Digital citizenship is often framed in terms of individual responsibility online, but this week’s focus on social media influencers highlights how it also applies to those with larger platforms. Influencers are not just content creators, they are key actors in shaping consumer behaviour, trends, and values. This raises an important question, can influencers promote more ethical forms of consumption, such as the slow fashion movement?

The slow fashion movement encourages consumers to move away from fast, disposable clothing and instead prioritise sustainability, ethical production, and long-term use. On platforms like Instagram and TikTok, many influencers now promote thrifted outfits, outfit repeating, and conscious shopping habits. According to research on digital influence and consumer culture, influencers play a significant role in shaping audience perceptions of what is desirable or “normal” behaviour online.

However, this creates a tension. Influencers are often part of the very system they critique. Fast fashion brands frequently rely on influencer marketing to promote high-volume consumption, which directly contradicts the principles of slow fashion. Even influencers who advocate sustainability may still participate in sponsored content or overconsumption, raising concerns about authenticity and what is sometimes referred to as “greenwashing”.

From a digital citizenship perspective, this brings to light the importance of accountability and transparency. Ethical digital participation is not just about what is posted, but also about the intentions and impacts behind that content. Influencers, who genuinely support slow fashion, can use their platforms to educate audiences, promote sustainable brands, and challenge harmful consumption habits. At the same time, audiences also have a role to play by critically evaluating the content they engage with and questioning whether it aligns with ethical practices.

A relevant example is the rise of “De-influencing” trends on TikTok, where creators actively discourage unnecessary purchases and critique viral products. This suggests a shift in online culture, where influence is not only used for promoting products, but also about encouraging more mindful consumption. While this does not completely solve the issues within influencer culture, it demonstrates how digital platforms can also support more responsible forms of engagement.

This case study shows that digital citizenship extends beyond individual users to include influencers and content creators alike. While there are clear contradictions within influencer culture, there is also potential for positive change. The challenge lies in whether influencers and their audiences are willing to prioritise ethical responsibility over convenience and profit.

References

Djafarova, E. and Trofimenko, O. (2019) ‘“Instafamous” – credibility and self-presentation of micro-celebrities on social media’, Information, Communication & Society, 22(10), pp. 1432–1446.

Abidin, C. (2016) ‘“Aren’t these just young, rich women doing vain things online?” Influencer selfies as subversive frivolity’, Social Media + Society.

Joy, A. et al. (2012) ‘Fast fashion, sustainability, and the ethical appeal of luxury brands’, Fashion Theory, 16(3), pp. 273–295.

Chokrane, B. (2023) ‘What is Deinfluencing? Unpacking TikTok’s Unlikeliest Shopping Trend’, Vogue.

[literaryyixuan]

Week 6 - Digital Citizenship

In today’s digital society, participating online is no longer just about communication. It is about citizenship! The concept of digital citizenship has evolved beyond basic online etiquette to include active participation in social and political issues through digital platforms. As Bakó argued in their journal, digital citizenship is increasingly tied to civic engagement, where users are expected not only to behave responsibly but also to contribute meaningfully to public discourse.

One way this participation becomes visible is through what Zizi Papacharissi describes as “affective publics”. These are networked groups that form around shared emotions and are often organised through hashtags on platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), TikTok and many more social media platforms. Rather than being structured communities, public hashtags are fluid and emerge quickly in response to events. This allows users to express their opinions and share information. Research shows that these publics are driven not only by information, but also by emotion, which shapes how people engage with political issues online.

This raises an important question however, does online participation actually lead to meaningful change? While hashtag activism can raise awareness and create visibility for issues, critics argue that it sometimes results in “slacktivism”, where users engage in low-effort actions without contributing to real-world impact. At the same time, studies of digital publics suggest that these online interactions still play a significant role in shaping political conversations and fostering a sense of collective identity.

A clear example of this can be seen in global hashtag movements such as #BlackLivesMatter, which demonstrate how online engagement can amplify social issues and mobilise widespread attention. However, the extent to which such visibility translates into long-term structural change remains contested.

From my view, I think digital citizenship today requires a balance between participation and responsibility. It is not enough to simply post or share content anymore as users must also critically evaluate information and consider the consequences of their online behaviour. Hashtag publics demonstrate the power of digital media to connect people, but they also highlight the need for more thoughtful, informed engagement.

Digital citizenship is no longer optional. It is a necessary skill for navigating a modern society where politics, identity, and communication are increasingly shaped by digital platforms.

References

Papacharissi, Z. (2014) Affective Publics: Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rathnayake, C. & Suthers, D. (2023) ‘A template for mapping emotion expression within hashtag publics’, Social Media + Society.

Kasianenko, K. (2026) ‘Digital publics and digital citizenship’, Communication Theory.

Bakó, R.K. (2021) ‘Beyond netiquette: Digital citizenship as participation’, Acta Universitatis Sapientiae.

Fernández-Prados, J.S. et al. (2021) ‘Measuring digital citizenship’, Informatics.

[literaryyixuan]

Week 5 - Reality TV Case Study

We have all seen our fair share of reality television, from MasterChef to Britain’s Got Talent and The Bachelor. The list goes on and on. Despite the popularity and commercial success of these programs, reality television remains one of the most disliked television genres, according to surveys regularly conducted in both Australia and the United States.

Why is this the case? There are many reasons, but three major criticisms stand out: manufactured authenticity, toxic drama and behaviour, and mental escape gone wrong. Manufactured authenticity refers to how producers edit situations to appear “real” while heavily scripting emotional moments for entertainment value. Toxic drama and behaviour are often encouraged because conflict attracts audiences and increases engagement. Meanwhile, viewers may turn to reality television for relaxation and escapism, but these shows can also normalise unhealthy relationships, unrealistic expectations, and problematic social behaviours.

Like social media, reality television is a form of entertainment that can shape public opinion and spark heated discussions in digital spaces. Although it is often criticised for being artificial and toxic, it remains a powerful media form that contributes to the creation of digital publics by encouraging discussion, emotional engagement, and social commentary online.

Reality television creates spaces where audiences can openly discuss important social issues. While debating the show itself, viewers also raise broader concerns about sexism, attitudes towards women, beauty standards, racism, and the role of marriage in contemporary society. Shows such as The Bachelor and Love Island create discussion spaces on Twitter, TikTok, Reddit, and Tumblr where audiences debate contestants’ behaviour, gender roles, and relationship expectations. These conversations extend the show beyond television and into participatory online culture.

Lundy, Ruth, and Park (2008) found that many people perceive a social stigma associated with watching reality television, yet they continue watching because of the escapism and social affiliation it provides. Similarly, Aslama and Pantti (2006) describe reality television as part of a contemporary confessional culture, where the disclosure of “true” emotions becomes the main attraction. This emotional exposure creates the illusion of authenticity, even when much of the content is carefully produced and edited.

Despite its negative reputation, reality television remains culturally significant because it creates shared conversations and digital participation that reflect wider social values and tensions.

References

Aslama, M., & Pantti, M. (2006). Talking alone: Reality TV, emotions and authenticity. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(2), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549406063162

Dubrofsky, R. E. (2011). The surveillance of women on reality television: Watching The Bachelor and The Bachelorette. Lexington Books.

Lundy, L. K., Ruth, A. M., & Park, T. D. (2008). Simply irresistible: Reality TV consumption patterns. Communication Quarterly, 56(2), 208–225.