mindfulmedia

uni blog by georgina

[mindfulmedia]

Digital Citizenship and Conflict: Social Media Governance

Week 10

Online digital communities can often be observed as unproblematic, wholesome places of inclusion. However, digital citizenship is riddled with conflict. Conflict via social media shows how digital citizenship is also about power. This power being over resources, over speech and over platforms. Who can we say is in control of the internet and social media? Social media governance is an ever increasing issue as the industry expands greatly, with guidance needed for both macro and micro settings. This governance is often a complex set of opposing interests.

Harassing behaviour is often coordinated and organised in networks (Marwick & Caplan 2018). Most of the abhorrent techniques used in networked harassment have now been linked to attacks against women, specifically during the online controversy of Gamergate (Marwick & Caplan 2018). Such acts included image-based abuse or revenge porn, doxing (posting personal information online), social shaming and intimidation (Marwick & Caplan 2018).

A study by The Guardian found that cyberhate or bullying often mirrors offline biases, prejudices and oppressions (Gardiner et al. 2016). Evidence for this was found in their research. From their research into the 70 million comments left on their articles from 2006, they found that of the 10 most abused writers, eight of whom were women, and the two men were black (Gardiner et al. 2016). The writers who happen to be women experience and attract more abuse and trolling when compared to the articles written by men, no matter what the subject of the article is (Gardiner et al. 2016).

What can we do? Now in Australia, there is no single legislation against online bullying or harassment. There are however some acts that offer some protection such as, the Criminal Code Act 1995. I believe that more should and could be done in the form of pressure from the platforms themselves. More content moderation needs to be seen as well as more integration of respectful platform usage detailed in their terms of service. We see most of this conflict and abuse coming through social media platforms, so if we as a community can place pressure upon the platforms to up their games, they might just listen.

~

References:

Marwick, A & Caplan, R 2018, ‘Drinking male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment’, Feminist Media Studies, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 543-559.

Gardiner, B, Mansfield, M, Anderson, I, Holder, J, Louter, D & Ulmanu M 2016, The dark side of Guardian comments, The Guardian, viewed 23 May 2021, <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/12/the-dark-side-of-guardian-comments>.

[mindfulmedia]

Slow Fashion & Social Media Influencers

Week 9

The world of digital citizenship and the ‘slow fashion’ movement are not considered new, but they have been gaining significant attention in recent years (Lai et al. 2017). The slow fashion movement has increased the awareness of sustainability and responsibility when it comes to fashion consumption. This rise has particularly been seen and felt through its social media traction.

The slow fashion movement first gained attention in the 1960s being linked to counter culture, then again in the 1980s in the form of anti-fur campaigns (Lai et al. 2017). It made another appearance in the 1990s and early 2000s through protests against unjust working conditions (Lai et al. 2017). Sustainable fashion includes services and goods that are relevant for basic needs, that decrease the use of toxic materials and waste emissions and pollutants over the life of the good or service (Lai et al. 2017). Sustainable fashion’s main aim is to not threaten the needs of future generations (Lai et al. 2017).

In today’s social media rich times, there are many influencers and corporations dedicated towards sustainable fashion. They make sustainable fashion their brand. This is a welcome change from the fast fashion hauls and overall saturation of it that we saw across the 2010s. We are seeing a lot more influencers favouring the slow fashion movement particularly through thrifting. Thrifting is going through a trending period now, where more people are open to upcycling other people’s clothes and through donating their own clothes. Another way to engage in the slow fashion movement is through fashion marketplace apps such as Depop or Carousell. There is the notion now in the slow fashion community that the gentrification of thrift stores or op shops is making access to affordable clothing more difficult for lower-income communities (Delgado 2020). As more middle-income and higher-income individuals shop there, causing prices to increase (Delgado 2020). It is therefore important to be aware of and assess your own needs when you’re looking to buy at thrift stores and not bulk buy when it is unnecessary. Thrifting is not bad by any means and should be encouraged, however but being exploitive with it through marked up resales or bulk buying is (Delgado 2020).

Good On You is a website and app that allows you to search for fashion brand ratings. These ratings are calculated in terms of brands’ ethical and sustainable practices, with their three main categories being planet, people and animals (Good On You 2021). Good On You is considered the benchmark for sustainable fashion (Good On You 2021).

Here is the link if anyone wants to check it out: https://goodonyou.eco/

Consider the things you buy.

~

References:

Delgado, V 2020, Thrift reselling is unethical, North Texas Daily, viewed 9 May 2021, <https://www.ntdaily.com/thrift-reselling-is-unethical/>.

Good On You, 2021, Wear the change you want to see, Good On You, viewed 9 May 2021, <https://goodonyou.eco/about/>.

Lai, Z, Henninger, C, Alevizou, P & Cham, J 2017, ‘An Exploration of Consumers’ Perceptions Towards Sustainable Fashion – A Qualitative Study in the UK’, Springer International Publishing Sustainability in Fashion, pp. 81-101.

[catchymemes]

[mindfulmedia]

Social gaming in 2020-2021

[mindfulmedia]

Gaming Communities, Social Gaming and Live Streaming

Week 8

Personally, I have only ever dabbled in a couple of social games like Words with Friends back in the day and in more recent lockdown times it called for Among Us or casual Mario Kart switch against the world. A ‘gaming’ past time for me when I was young, when computers were stuck to desks and I had to share it with my brothers, was the good old Sims on PC. With hard core gaming not being on my radar I failed to realise how big it had become until I started studying at university.

I appreciate that game culture has come a long way. While it may still be engrained in the stereotypes of young, male nerds, I welcome the fact that this is changing and we are seeing evolution in games, the games industry and in games culture. I like that games are an essential form of social activity for people, creating and growing communities, even before the internet with arcade games.

Social games can be defined as online games that build upon your friendships through play, while not taking away from your daily life and routine (Järvinen 2011). The wave of social games that harnessed the power of the internet began in the 1990s and went on through to 2010 (Taylor 2018, p. 4). These multiplayer connections enabled a more global and competitive space (Taylor 2018, p. 4). A third wave is also noted as starting around 2010, which was centred on the growth of live streaming and networking. It is during this time that esports has become more than just a sports product and become a full media entertainment outlet (Taylor 2018, p.4).

A lot has changed in the world of live streaming in the last decade (Taylor 2018, p. 3). Thanks to Twitch a now broadcasting platform dedicated to gaming, that was originally part of the social cam site Justin.tv in 2011 Taylor 2018, p. 3). Twitch is seen as having played a massive role in the reshaping of the gaming industry (Taylor 2018, p. 3). In 2017, Twitch had 2.2+ million unique broadcasters per month, and around 10 million daily active users (Taylor 2018, p.3). It hosts games from a wide range of genres, with weekend esports tournaments typically reaching millions of viewers (Taylor 2018, p.3). The overall evolution of live streaming as a medium for new game content and broadcasting is undeniable (Taylor 2018, p.3).

Is there a limit to where gaming can go? 

~

References:

Järvinen, A 2011, State of social in social games [Presentation slides], viewed 1 May 2021, <http://casualconnect.org/lectures/community-social/state-of-social-in-social-games/>.

Taylor, TL 2018, ‘Broadcasting ourselves’ (chapter 1), in Watch Me Play: Twitch and the Rise of Game Live Streaming, Princeton University Press, pp. 1-23.

[cyberbullyinc]

its funny how kardashian apologists are always like “ur just mad they have everything u could want 🤪” girlie they don’t even have self esteem ☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️

[mindfulmedia]

This is a funny tidbit relating to my last blog post. Their self-esteem be hiding behind filters or? 

[mindfulmedia]

Software Literacy: Instagram filters

Week 7 

“Arata was infuriated to see her face virtually twisted into something so attractive that the filter’s beautifying effects could not be counteracted. By thinning out the face, slimming and shortening the nose, enlarging the eyes, plumping the lips, and smoothing out the skin, Snapchat seizes a user’s features and morphs them into compliance with a stereotypical form of beauty” (Barker 2020, p. 209).

Personally, I don’t have much exposure to the use of filters on my own. I remember when they were first originating that it was a funny experiment with friends to see how crazy our faces would turn, or how we looked as an animal/human hybrid. However, I do distinctly remember certain friends seeing the need to add a filter to any images she would take of herself or our group of friends, which then I might not have thought twice about, but now reflecting upon it and studying this topic I wonder how filters have come to have such an effect on people like this.

This week’s topic centred upon filters, from Snapchat to Instagram. Filters can be referred to as AR (Augmented Reality) filters. This is due to filters using augmented reality technology that grants users the ability to see the real world while superimposing virtual images on or around themselves or their environment (Azuma 1997, p. 355). Filters can be seen as a digital mask, reacting specifically to movements and expressions.

Why do people use filters? They are continuously becoming more ubiquitous, with a sense that many people are adopting them. Filters can also go about changing self-perceptions on a grand scale. The theory of ‘Digitised Dysmorphia’ is conceptualised by Coy-Dibley (2016), as a tool that helps to comprehend the pressures placed upon women to alter their digital image. Digitised dysmorphia is a socially constructed condition that is on a spectrum with Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) and aided by digital technology (Coy-Dibley 2016, p. 2). However, it isn’t always intrinsically negative, with positive uses being found for this beauty technology (Coy-Dibley 2016, p. 2-3).

The introduction of filters began in the form of ephemeral, amusing and harmless additions to your seemingly ‘ugly’ and raw photos (Barker 2020, p. 11). The early likes of bunny ears and the infamous dog face. Slowly as the filter trend took off, it changed from these authentic, innocent and genuine add-ons to fit in with another basic social media ‘beauty pageant’ if you will (Barker 2020, p. 11). The filters of today generally enforce the unavoidable ‘hetero-sexy’ ideals of femininity, aligned with Coy Dibley’s proposition that it’s tough to use this beautifying technology for anything other than ‘beautifying your image’. Both Snapchat and Instagram filters have been criticised for being racist (Barker 2020, p. 209). “People of colour find their complexions unnaturally and undesirably lightened by Snapchat filters” (Barker 2020, p. 9). This is truly upsetting to note that in recent times this is still an occurrence with companies that are so ingrained and routine in people’s everyday lives.

I find it interesting to note that people with pre-existing body image concerns, have been found to be more likely to be frequent users of filters (Burnell, Kurup & Underwood 2021). I wonder if this research suggests that we are seeing or may see more body image concerns through the next generation growing up with and around filters?

~

References:

Azuma, R 1997, ‘A Survey of Augmented Reality’, In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 355-386.

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

Burnell, K, Kurup, A R, & Underwood, M K 2021, ‘Snapchat lenses and body image concerns’, New Media & Society, pp. 1-19.

Coy-Dibley, I 2016, ‘Digitized Dysmorphia of the female body: the re/disfigurement of the image’, Palgrave Communications, vol. 2, no. 16040, pp. 2-9.

[mindfulmedia]

Body modification of Visual Social Media

Week 6

Body modification sadly, is so widespread across visual social platforms, that it is common knowledge to most users that those with the largest of followings do or have modified their body in the images they post. I understand that some people may not think anything of the modified images they consume every day on social media, while others do.

Often these modified images are the work of a fairly new form of microcelebrity. These microcelebrities are a new identity of individuals that are often exclusive to online spaces, who gain status and significance through online visibility (Senft 2012; Marwick 2013).

Many of these microcelebrities are capitalising on the growth of the ‘influencer commerce’, with influencers being a type of microcelebrity (Drenton, Gurrieri & Tyler 2019 p. 42). Influencers aim to create digital content that garners a large level of attention or ‘following’ (Drenton, Gurrieri & Tyler 2019 p. 42). Instagram is the current platform of choice for influencers to integrate promotions of products and services through digital images and videos, often in partnership with brands (Drenton, Gurrieri & Tyler 2019 p. 42).

The body plays a large role in the visual field of being an influencer, with it being normal to produce selfies and full body images for prosumer labour and to achieve the ‘aesthetic template’ (Drenton, Gurrieri & Tyler 2019 p. 42). Modifying your body; whether this be via photo editing such as the use of filters or photoshop, or through real body changes such as plastic surgery or fillers, is the new normal for influencers to fit and truly encapsulate this new aesthetic template. A women’s self-presentation on social media is also researched as being highly sexualised (Drenton, Gurrieri & Tyler 2019 p. 42).

A new mainstream has evolved through the intensification of visual social platforms, known as the ‘porn chic’ aesthetic (Drenton, Gurrieri & Tyler 2019 p. 42). Conforming to the heteronormative ideals of feminine and masculine attractiveness is somewhat common nature on these visual social media platforms, particularly on Instagram, and is critical for acquiring and holding attention (Duffy 2017).

Do we think the modified images influencers regularly post can be put down to something as simple as scrutiny? Peer pressure? Aesthetic template? Self-esteem issues? Personal preference? All of these, or something else entirely?

~

For this topic in particular I also wanted to share the I Weigh Community, by Jameela Jamil. The I Weigh Community started by actress and activist Jameela, started off as a humble Instagram account that was curated as a safe and inclusive space on social media. Jameela wanted to change the visual social media narrative and showcase how everyone weighs in anything but kilograms. People would post an image of themselves with captions like “I weigh my great friendships, my honesty, my kindness and my family”. Jameela is an advocate for all different norms when it comes to our bodies, that being ‘thin’ isn’t the pinnacle of health or attraction. The I Weigh community has expanded greatly in the past two years centering on inclusivity, now with a brilliant podcast, different activists and powerful movements. 

Here is the link to this greatly positive and inspiring Instagram if anyone is interested! https://www.instagram.com/i_weigh/?hl=en

References:

Drenten, J, Gurrieri, L & Tyler, M 2019, ‘Sexualized labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention’, Gender, Work and Organization, vol. 27, pp. 41 – 46.

Duffy, B 2017, (Not) getting paid to do what you love: Gender, social media, and aspirational work, New Haven, Yale University Press.

Marwick, AE 2013, Status update: celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Senft, T 2012, Microcelebrity and the Branded Self. In Hartley, J, Burgess, J & Bruns, A (Ed.), A Companion to New Media Dynamics, Blackwell, UK.

[mindfulmedia]

What is digital citizenship?

Week 5

Digital citizenship can be seen as the public participation online, often through social media as it is now such a big part of our daily lives (Vromen 2017 p. 2). Digital citizenship refers to engagement, most regularly being realised through political processes, election processes or activism and appropriate technology use. It enables individuals to connect and contribute with possible societal benefits being reached (Mossberger et al. 2008). Social media has been a direct driver of the development of digital and political citizenship (Vromen 2017 p. 2).

Political engagement has been shifting in the past decade, with a move towards more personalised, ad hoc involvement in our advanced democracies (Vromen 2017, p. 2). This is in favour of traditional formal political groups, with memberships experiencing a vast decline (Vromen 2017, p. 2).

Personally, when I was a teenager, I cannot remember people my age being as politically active on social media as the teenagers of today are. It pleases me to see more young people being more politically aware and active surrounding issues that will affect our future, such as Climate Change. This can be seen through the increased use of hashtags. Hashtags assist in the formation of their own ‘hashtag publics’ (Bruns & Burgess 2012 p. 804). It allows for ad hoc communities to be formed for dissemination and discussion of anything from trending topics, breaking news and political issues (Bruns & Burgess 2012 p. 804). Hashtags also enable connectivity through themes, events and keywords. As I found from leading the tutorial discussion this week, the major consensus surrounding hashtags was that they can, and do play a role in activism and social change in today’s world.

In today’s platform economy, platforms hold a great deal of power in regard to negotiations, contestation and possible acts of resistance (Vromen 2017, p. 6). It’s interesting to note how our understanding of a digital citizen was largely shaped over the last ten years.

How will our perception of a digital citizen change again over the next ten years?

~

References:

Bruns, A & Burgess, J 2012, ‘RESEARCHING NEWS DISCUSSIONS ON TWITTER’, Journalism Studies, vol. 13, no. 5-6, pp. 801-814.

Mossberger, K, Tolbert, C J, McNeal, R S 2008, Digital Citizenship : The Internet, Society, and Participation, MIT Press, Ebook Central (Proquest).

Vromen, A 2017, Digital Citizenship and Political Engagement The Challenge from Online Campaigning and Advocacy Organisations, Palgrave Macmillan, London.

[marisatomay]

no more guilty pleasures we enjoy things because we like them

[mindfulmedia]

Digital Community and Fandom: Reality TV

Week 4 

Who are you if you haven't found yourself sucked into the dimension of reality TV replays? I sure am guilty, whether it be a little Survivor or The Bachelor. The thing is, they're often replayed with episode after episode, then all of a sudden there's no way out.

Why do we feel such a connection to this often overly scripted sense of someone else's 'reality'?

While some reality TV shows can be seen as entertaining, many of us only admit to watching it as our ‘guilty pleasure’. Reality TV is understood as “ordinary people engaged in unscripted action and interaction” (Nabi 2007). There is something fascinating as a human about seeing what we believe to be as ordinary people, going about their daily lives or being placed in a new life and having to interact with other seemingly ‘normal’ people.

With new romantic and competitive reality TV shows constantly being created, hitting multiple genres, the stars of these shows are increasingly in the spotlight, from not only the show, but also from social media. The growth of social media integration with reality TV has made these once ‘ordinary’ people into what we call reality TV ‘stars’. Reality TV participants are viewed as "expandable celetoids" with an often brief and fleeting look into the world of fame, constructed solely by the media's representation of them (Arcy 2018 p. 488). Reality TV producers often try to select diverse contestants, to show differing lifestyles in the hopes of producing a 'lively and exciting' series (Graham & Hajru 2011, p. 11). The main focus of these reality stars is to play the more intensified and improved versions of themselves (Arcy 2018, p. 488). And yet, we are so fascinated by them and their lives.

These reality stars are what keep us connected to the show and the drama, which is what they all want. I think that reality TV is less about the show and so much more about the people. The people, no matter who or how they are, are our connection.

Whether we feel a likeness to them at all, or just live for the tea and chaotic energy, reality TV is here for us when we want or need a fix.

~

References:

Arcy, J 2018, ‘The digital money shot: Twitter wars, The Real Housewives, and transmedia storytelling’, Celebrity Studies, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 487-502.

Graham, T & Hajru, A 2011, ‘Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere’, European Journal of Communication, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 19-29.

Nabi, R L 2007, ‘Determining dimensions of reality: a concept mapping the reality of the TV landscape’, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 371-390.

[mindfulmedia]

Digital Communities and Blogging

‘How does Tumblr function as a digital community?’

When I created this Tumblr account, the main Tumblr landing page that prompts you to either ‘log in’ or ‘sign up’, also featured a rather fitting quote that read “Make stuff, look at stuff, talk about stuff, find your people”. I thought that, in particular, the final three words mean a great deal more in understanding the world that is Tumblr.

Tumblr operates as an alternative world from our own, where like, and seemingly unalike people can connect through mutual passions, in an atypical atmosphere all of its of own (McCracken 2020, p. 2).

Tumblr has always been a unique place (McCracken 2020, p. 2). This is how Tumblr has been found at the forefront of online digital communities. Tumblr is unique due to the dedication of its users, its social communities and its platform affordances. A vast majority of Tumblr users are on the platform for a specific reason, to connect and feel a sense of belong to a certain community or fandom. Many of their users may have been seeking this from other platforms, but ultimately landed with Tumblr for its welcoming and wide-ranging digital community presence.

Tumblr is a master of the notion “digital socialities”, a concept that recognises the numerous diverse qualities of social relationships online (Postill & Pink 2012). Tumblr has a reputation for being a friendly space, which only helps in fostering new and more profound digital communities (Keller 2019, p. 9). Tumblr also allows its users to escape and move beyond their local community (Keller 2019, p. 9).

Tumblr as a platform contributes many affordances to its users. It gives users the capacity to recontextualise and circulate a variety of media through long and short format text, images, videos, audio and GIFs (McCracken 2020, p. 2).

All of this in operation is what allows Tumblr to be a digital community.

“find your people”

~

References:

Keller, J 2019, ‘“Oh, She’s a Tumblr Feminist”: Exploring the Platform Vernacular of Girls’ Social Media Feminisms’, Social Media + Society, pp. 1-11.

McCracken, A 2020, a Tumblr Book: Platform and Cultures, University of Michigan Press, viewed day 23 March 2021, <https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11537055.>

Postill, J, & Pink, S 2012, ‘Social media ethnography: The digital researcher in a messy web’ Media International Australia, vol. 145, pp. 123–134.