#instagramfilters

[daphanie18]

Week 9: Digital Citizenship and Software literacy: Instagram Filters

Hi everyone 👋 welcome back to my blog!

In this week's reflection, I will be discussing digital citizenship and software literacy through the use of Instagram filters. Instagram filters have become a common feature of social media, allowing users to enhance photos and videos with just a few taps. While filters can be creative and entertaining, they also raise important questions about digital citizenship and how people understand the technology they use.

Software literacy refers to the ability to understand, evaluate, and use digital tools effectively. In today's digital world, it is not enough to simply know how to use an app. Users should also understand how software influences the content they see and create online (Pangrazio & Selwyn, 2021). Instagram filters are a good example because they use augmented reality (AR) technology to modify a person's appearance in real time.

Many Instagram filters can smooth skin, brighten eyes, reshape facial features, and create idealised versions of beauty. While these effects may seem harmless, they can influence how users view themselves and others. Research has shown that appearance-altering filters can contribute to body dissatisfaction and unrealistic beauty expectations, particularly among young people (Vendemia et al., 2021).

From a digital citizenship perspective, users should be aware that filtered images do not always reflect reality. Being a responsible digital citizen means thinking critically about the content we post and consume online. It also involves understanding how social media platforms encourage certain beauty standards through popular filters and trends (Choi, 2020).

At the same time, Instagram filters can be used positively. Many creators use filters for artistic expression, storytelling, education, and entertainment. Software literacy helps users recognise both the benefits and limitations of these tools. By understanding how filters work, users can make more informed decisions about their online behaviour and digital identity.

Overall, Instagram filters demonstrate the connection between software literacy and digital citizenship. As social media technology continues to evolve, users need the skills to critically evaluate digital tools and understand their impact on self-image, communication, and online culture.

Reference

Choi, M. (2020). Digital citizenship for democratic citizenship: A challenge for transformative learning. Adult Learning, 31(4), 141–148. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306930360_A_Concept_Analysis_of_Digital_Citizenship_for_Democratic_Citizenship_Education_in_the_Internet_Age

Pangrazio, L., & Selwyn, N. (2021). Towards a school-based ‘critical data education’. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 29(3), 431–448. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340313639_Towards_a_school-based_'critical_data_education'

Vendemia, M. A., DeAndrea, D. C., & Brathwaite, K. N. (2021). The effects of exposure to idealized Instagram images on body image and appearance-related attitudes. Psychology of Popular Media, 10(4), 491–500. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366296906_An_intersectional_approach_to_evaluating_the_effectiveness_of_women's_sexualized_body-positive_imagery_on_Instagram

[irfanfarid998]

 Week 9: Digital Citizenship and Software literacy: Instagram Filters

Social media culture now heavily relies on Instagram filters. Although the original purpose of filters was to enhance the appearance of photos through colour adjustments and effects, many now use augmented reality (AR) technology to smooth skin, change facial features, and create idealised versions of users. This development brings to light significant concerns about software literacy and digital citizenship.

The ability to comprehend how software and digital technologies influence online experiences is known as software literacy. Software-literate users are able to assess their tools critically and understand how platforms affect communication and behaviour (Rettberg, 2017). Instagram filters are a prime example since they have the power to alter people's online personas and how others see them.

The effect of Instagram filters on self-esteem and body image is a major topic of discussions. Users of social media platforms are frequently exposed to heavily edited and filtered photos, which can lead to the creation of unattainable beauty standards. The Royal Society for Public Health (2017) states that social media, especially among youth, may worsen anxiety, low self-esteem, and body dissatisfaction. Users may form unfavourable opinions of their own appearance if they frequently compare themselves to filtered images.

People are encouraged to use technology critically and responsibly thorugh digital citizenship. Users should be aware that a lot of photos shared on the internet have been altered or improved. People can make more informed choices about the content they share and consume if they are aware of this. Influencers and content creators also need to think about how their use of filters might impact the viewers.

Instagram filters can be useful in spite of these worries. They enable users to interact with online communities, express their creativity, and produce amusing content. The increasing popularity of AR filters made by users shows how software can promote engagement and creativity in virtual environments.

Overall, Instagram filters demonstrate how software influences social interactions and digital identities. To help people use social media responsibly and comprehend how digital technologies affect daily life, software literacy development is crucial.

References

Rettberg, J.W. (2017) Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Royal Society for Public Health (2017) #StatusOfMind: Social Media and Young People's Mental Health and Wellbeing. London: Royal Society for Public Health. Available at: https://www.rsph.org.uk/our-work/campaigns/status-of-mind.html

Pew Research Center (2024) Teens, Social Media and Technology 2024. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org

[jingdiyew]

“Seeing Through the Filter: Instagram Filters and Software Literacy in Digital Citizenship”

Week 9: Digital Citizenship and Software literacy: Instagram Filters

In today’s digital culture, social media users interact with software constantly, often without fully understanding how it shapes their online experiences. One important concept discussed this week is software literacy, which refers to the ability to critically understand how digital tools, algorithms, filters, and platforms influence communication, identity, and behavior online. Software literacy is now an essential part of digital citizenship because social media platforms are not neutral spaces — they actively shape how users present themselves and interact with others.

A strong example of this can be seen through Instagram filters. On Instagram, filters are widely used to enhance photos and videos by smoothing skin, changing facial structure, adjusting lighting, or adding visual effects. Although filters may appear harmless or entertaining, they also influence beauty standards and self-perception. Many users, especially young people, become accustomed to seeing idealized versions of themselves online, which can affect confidence and body image.

Research shows that image-editing features and augmented reality (AR) filters can contribute to unrealistic beauty expectations and increased appearance dissatisfaction (Parry et al., 2021). This is especially significant because many filters subtly alter facial features without users fully recognizing how dramatically their appearance has changed. Software therefore becomes invisible yet powerful in shaping identity and social interaction online.

One example that gained widespread attention was Instagram’s removal of certain cosmetic surgery filters in 2019 after concerns that they negatively affected mental health. Filters that simulated plastic surgery effects were criticized for encouraging users to compare themselves to unrealistic beauty standards. This demonstrates how software design can directly influence psychological well-being and public perceptions of beauty (BBC News, 2019).

In the Malaysian context, Instagram filters are heavily used among lifestyle influencers and content creators. Influencers such as Vivy Yusof often share polished and aesthetically curated content that reflects broader Instagram beauty culture. While these visuals are part of branding and digital marketing strategies, they also contribute to audience expectations about appearance and lifestyle. Many users may not realise how much editing, lighting adjustment, or filter enhancement contributes to these seemingly “perfect” images.

Software literacy becomes important because users need to recognise that social media content is often shaped by algorithms and editing tools rather than representing reality directly. According to Manovich (2020), software now acts as a cultural layer that influences nearly every aspect of modern communication and media production. In other words, software is no longer just a tool — it actively structures digital culture itself.

At the same time, filters are not entirely negative. Many creators use them creatively for humour, storytelling, branding, or artistic expression. Instagram filters can make content more engaging and allow users to experiment with identity in playful ways (Rahman et al., 2022). However, digital citizens must still approach these tools critically and understand how they affect perceptions of authenticity, beauty, and self-worth.

In my opinion, software literacy is becoming just as important as traditional media literacy. People often focus on the content they see online without questioning the software systems behind it. Understanding how filters, algorithms, and editing tools operate can help users become more informed and responsible digital citizens. Rather than blindly accepting filtered realities, users should develop critical awareness about how digital platforms shape both online culture and personal identity.

References

Parry, D. A., Fisher, J. T., Mieczkowski, H., Sewall, C. J., & Davidson, B. I. (2021). Social media and well-being: A methodological perspective. Current Opinion in Psychology, 45, 101285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.11.005

BBC News. (2019, October 23). Instagram bans “cosmetic surgery” filters. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50152053

Manovich, L. (2020). Cultural Analytics. In The MIT Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11214.001.0001

Rahman, W. N. A., Mutum, D. S., & Ghazali, E. M. (2022). Consumer engagement with visual content on Instagram. International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications, 14(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijesma.295960

[gladysl0w]

Week 9: Digital Citizenship and Software literacy: Instagram Filters

Andddd welcome back to another week of Yapping with Gladys ✨

Remember when filters were just… fun? Like the iconic dog ears, rainbow tongue, or the filter with the huge eyes and mouth where you literally can’t see the rest of your face 😭 Thinking about it now may kinda be cringe and honestly, I still use that one whenever I don’t want to show my face but still want to post something funny. But don’t you think filters feel very different now?

Lenslist ✨ Augmented Reality Marketing on Instagram: "Take us back! 😩✨ Who remembers the OG Snapchat Lenses? The flower crowns, iconic Dog

64 likes, 5 comments - lens.list on August 6, 2025: "Take us back! 😩✨ Who remembers the OG Snapchat Lenses? The flower crowns, iconic Dog F

Growing up, one of my favourite things to do whenever I visited Japan or even the local arcades was taking Purikura photos with friends. If you've never seen them before, Purikura are Japanese photo booths that automatically enlarge your eyes, smooth your skin, slim your face, and basically turn you into the cutest anime character imaginable. At the time, it felt harmless and fun. Nobody actually believed they looked like that after stepping out of the booth.

Today, filters are no longer just playful add-ons. They are powered by augmented reality (AR), which overlays digital elements onto the real world in real time (Azuma, 1997). Platforms like Snapchat and Instagram have transformed filters from obvious silly effects into subtle tools that reshape how we look and how we see ourselves.

If you think about it.. isn't that basically the ancestor of Instagram filters right?

What fascinates me is that beauty filters are not actually a new technology. The desire to digitally "improve" our appearance has existed for decades. What has changed is the scale, accessibility, and invisibility of the technology. Instead of visiting a photo booth once in a while, we now carry beauty filters in our pockets every day through Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok.

img from https://yanabalci.medium.com/do-you-use-instagram-face-filters-for-stories-5d0f3ba75119

Back then, filters were clearly fake. Nobody thought the dog filter was supposed to make you prettier 😭 But now, many filters are designed to enhance appearance: smoother skin, sharper jawlines, bigger eyes, smaller noses. According to Rettberg (2014), filters don’t simply “remove” imperfections.. they create a new version of reality. What we’re seeing online is not necessarily the uglier version of us, but a carefully edited version of who we could be.

What makes the comparison between Purikura and Instagram filters particularly interesting is that they seem to represent two very different digital cultures. Purikura is a social activity with friends after school, at arcades, or while travelling. The cartoon-like features were obviously unrealistic, and that was part of the fun. Nobody was trying to convince others that they naturally looked like a kawaii anime character 😭. Instagram filters, on the other hand, are often tied to personal branding and influencer culture. Rather than looking fake, many modern filters aim to appear natural by subtly smoothing skin, reshaping facial features, or enhancing attractiveness without noticeable features. This connects to what scholars call aesthetic templates, a repeated visual standards that shape how users present themselves online. This also reflects Barker's (2020) argument that social media filters have shifted from a space of creative experimentation into something closer to a digital beauty pageant.

gif from https://tenor.com/view/jaemin-na-jaemin-nct-nct-dream-eye-roll-gif-23541815

The scary part? Filters are becoming harder to detect. What used to be obviously edited is now subtle and almost natural just like what Lavrence and Cambre (2020) describe as “ambient editing.” Because of this, people began comparing themselves to obviously fake images because they assume its real. This links to social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954), where repeated exposure to idealised images can negatively affect self-esteem and body image.

Over time, this may contribute to digitised dysmorphia (Coy-Dibley, 2016), where individuals feel pressure to alter their real appearance to match their filtered selves. Some people now even bring filtered selfies to cosmetic consultations 😭 What started as a funny social media feature has evolved into something that can shape identity, perception, and even physical choices offline.

So where does this leave digital citizenship? I think being a digital citizen today is not just about using technology responsibly... it’s also about understanding how technology quietly shapes our behaviours, standards, and self-perception. Filters can still be fun (trust me I’m never giving up the silly ones, I love using it to covering up my faces with my friends), but they also reflect larger cultural ideas about beauty and identity.

At the end of the day, maybe the question isn’t whether filters are “good” or “bad.” Maybe it’s about awareness. Because the next time we use a filter, a cute one or funny one.. it’s worth asking: what version of myself am I choosing to show online, and why?

References (APA 7th)

Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355–385.

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

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

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140.

Lavrence, C., & Cambre, C. (2020). “Do I look like my selfie?”: Filters and the digital-forensic gaze.

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

[seanerhh]

The Filtered Mirror: How Instagram Filters Shape Our Self-Image

“Hey there, fellow filter explorers!” ✨ So, let’s talk about something we all know too well: Instagram filters. You know, the ones that smooth out your skin, make your eyes pop, and give you that “glow-up” in an instant. They’re fun, right? But have you ever stopped to think about

How are these filters changing the way we see ourselves?

Filters have become a staple in our social media routines. They promise to enhance our features, making us look more polished and, dare I say, perfect. But here’s the catch: these filters often present an idealized version of beauty that doesn’t reflect reality. This phenomenon has been termed “digitized dysmorphia,” a concept introduced by Coy-Dibley (2016), which describes the distortion of self-perception due to the prevalence of digitally altered images. While filters can boost confidence temporarily, they can also lead to negative consequences.

Research indicates that frequent use of beauty filters on platforms like Instagram can contribute to body dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem, particularly among young women (Barker, 2020).

The constant comparison to these enhanced images can create a gap between our real selves and the filtered versions we present online.

The pressure to conform to these digital beauty standards is real.

A study by Lo Destro (2024) found that individuals with lower self-esteem or those who are more susceptible to external opinions are more likely to place greater importance on using filters.

This can lead to a cycle where the desire for validation through filtered images outweighs the appreciation of one’s natural appearance.

So, what does this mean for us as digital citizens? It means being aware of how filters influence our self-perception and the perceptions of others. It’s about recognizing that while filters can be fun and creative tools, they shouldn’t define our worth or beauty. Embracing authenticity and promoting a culture of self-acceptance online can help mitigate the negative impacts of these digital enhancements.

In Conclusion 🔚

Instagram filters are more than just tools for enhancing photos; they are shaping our digital identities and influencing our self-image. As we navigate this digital landscape, let’s strive for authenticity and self-love, remembering that the real beauty lies in our unfiltered selves.

References:

Barker, J. W. (2020). Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat. Fashion, Style & Popular Culture, 7(2 & 3), 207-223.

Coy-Dibley, I. (2016). “Digitized Dysmorphia” of the female body: The re/disfigurement of the image. Palgrave Communications, 2(1).

Lo Destro, C. (2024). Unraveling the impact of self-esteem on the utilization of Instagram filters: The mediating role of fear of negative evaluation. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1302662.

[sshirotalk]

WEEK 8: Digital Citizenship and Software Literacy: The Cultural Politics of Instagram Filters

With over 700 million users engaging with AR filters monthly on Meta platforms, filters are no longer just playful tools—they have become a fundamental part of how we construct identity online. But as someone who frequently uses social media, I often ask myself: Are filters helping me creatively express myself, or are they quietly disciplining me into conforming to algorithm-driven beauty standards?

GIF by sustancy

Digital Citizens and Internalized Surveillance

As Choi and Cristol (2021) argue, digital citizenship today requires software literacy—the ability to recognize how technologies like filters shape our digital identities and data practices. Personally, I’ve noticed how filters now “automatically” beautify my face according to platform trends. Sometimes, I forget what my face really looks like without digital enhancement.

Rettberg (2017) points out that AR filters normalize facial recognition, training users and platforms alike to accept face-scanning as routine. This reminds me of Foucault’s (1977) Panopticism, where individuals self-regulate under invisible surveillance. Adjusting my selfies to fit the "Instagram standard" feels like this modern panopticon at play.

GIF by cleopatrachampagne

Self-Objectification and Everyday Filtering

Fredrickson & Roberts (1997) argue that women are particularly vulnerable to self-objectification when constantly viewing themselves through external, social lenses. I resonate with this—sometimes I feel dissatisfied with my unfiltered self compared to my “filtered” self on social media.

Barker (2020) discusses how filters promote “algorithmic aesthetics”, privileging Eurocentric beauty ideals like smooth skin, large eyes, and smaller noses. Coy-Dibley (2016) terms this effect “digitized dysmorphia,” where filters distort users’ perceptions of their real bodies. Personally, I’ve grown so accustomed to subtle filter enhancements that my natural appearance sometimes feels “off” or less polished. This "ambient filtering" effect, as Barker describes, gradually shifts our baseline for what “normal” looks like.

Surveillance Culture and Beauty Standards

I’ve also found myself engaging in what Lavrence & Cambre (2020) describe as the “digital-forensic gaze”—scrutinizing others' photos to see if they’ve been filtered. This contributes to a beauty surveillance culture where we not only self-police but also monitor others’ appearances.

The rise of “Snapchat Dysmorphia” (Rajanala, Maymone & Vashi, 2018), where people seek cosmetic surgery to match their filtered selves, illustrates how digital beauty standards spill over into real life. Even though Instagram banned plastic surgery filters in 2019, subtle “beautifying” filters still dominate—and I see them everywhere.

Beyond Beauty: Filters, Biometric Surveillance, and Data Extraction

Filters are not just tools for self-expression; they also function as data collection mechanisms. Rettberg (2017) warns that filters prime users for biometric tracking, normalizing face scanning and algorithmic surveillance. While platforms present AR filters as harmless entertainment, they simultaneously collect vast amounts of facial data, raising concerns about privacy and digital rights. The integration of beauty filters into commercial applications, such as AliPay’s face-scan payment system, highlights how digital self-representation is increasingly intertwined with biometric verification.

Conclusion: The Future of AR Filters and Digital Citizenship

The widespread adoption of AR filters raises essential questions about digital identity, beauty norms, and privacy. Are we freely expressing ourselves, or are we subtly being shaped by algorithmic aesthetics? The tension between empowerment and surveillance, self-expression and commercialization, remains central to the debate on AR filters. As digital citizens, we must critically engage with these tools, advocating for greater transparency in platform governance and algorithmic decision-making.

💡 Questions to Consider:

Do AR filters expand creative self-expression, or do they impose new beauty standards?

Should platforms regulate beauty filters more strictly to prevent body dysmorphia?

How can users push back against the biometric tracking embedded in AR technology?

📌 Let’s discuss! Do you think filters empower or manipulate digital self-representation? Comment below!

References:

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

Choi, M., & Cristol, D. (2021). Digital citizenship with an intersectionality lens: Towards participatory democracy-driven digital citizenship education. Theory into Practice, 60(4), 361–370.

Coy-Dibley, I. (2016). “Digitised Dysmorphia” of the Female Body: The Re/Disfigurement of the Image. Palgrave Communications, 2, 16040. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.40

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Pantheon Books.

Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women's lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173-206.

Lavrence, C., & Cambre, C. (2020). “Do I look like my selfie?” Filters and the digital-forensic gaze. Visual Communication Research.

Rajanala, S., Maymone, M. B. C., & Vashi, N. A. (2018). Selfies—Living in the Era of Filtered Photographs. JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, 20(6), 443-444. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2018.0486

[rikulikestodraw13]

Follow me on Webtoons if you like to read customer service comics!

Webtoons: rikulikestodraw

[jewy-gum]

🌐 Week Eight: Digital Citizenship and Software Literacy - Instagram Filters 📸✨

In today’s post, we’re diving into the world of Instagram filters and their role in shaping digital citizenship and software literacy. Filters are more than just fun effects - they influence how we see ourselves and others, sometimes altering perceptions in profound ways. With their growing popularity, understanding the implications of filters can help us navigate social media more responsibly.

🌈 The Allure and Impact of Instagram Filters

Instagram filters are a staple of visual social media, allowing users to modify their photos with the tap of a screen. While these filters can be creative and entertaining, they also present a version of reality that isn’t entirely authentic. Filters act as cultural tools that shape our perceptions, subtly reinforcing beauty ideals by smoothing skin, brightening eyes, or changing skin tones (Rettberg 2014). Filters, in this way, aren’t just decorative - they influence what we see as desirable and even “normal.”

As users, we should be aware of how filters affect our self-image and interactions with others. Filters can reinforce narrow beauty standards that leave little room for diversity. For example, beauty filters can often alter facial features to align with Eurocentric ideals, which can be damaging to self-esteem and cultural identity (Baker 2020). This isn’t just a minor issue; it’s a form of digital literacy we must cultivate to critically engage with the content we create and consume.

You can easily find a series of "HOW TO LOOK LIKE AN INSTGRAM FILTER IN REAL LIFE" on Google.

👁️ Biometric Influence: Filters and Machine Vision

Instagram filters don’t just modify images; they also teach us how to interact with machine vision. Filters work by using augmented reality (AR) to superimpose changes onto our faces in real-time, effectively turning our selfies into data for machine learning (Rettberg, 2017). This process can affect our self-perception, as we adapt our images to match the “ideal” encoded within the filters. According to Rettberg (2017), our engagement with these filters is part of a broader trend toward biometric citizenship, where our faces become data points in algorithmic systems (Rettberg, 2017).

The implications of this are significant. As we grow accustomed to using filters, we might be subtly shifting our ideas of beauty and self-worth to align with machine-driven standards. It’s essential to develop software literacy so we can understand the influence these tools have on us and use them more mindfully.

🔍 Navigating the Ethics of Filter Use

Understanding software literacy means recognizing both the benefits and drawbacks of filters. While filters can be fun and allow for creative expression, they can also lead to digital deskilling, as we rely on pre-made effects rather than creating original content. Filters encourage us to present polished versions of ourselves, which might not always reflect reality. By questioning our use of filters, we engage in digital citizenship, making informed choices about how we want to be perceived online (Barker, 2020).

In light of this, digital citizens can make a conscious effort to either reject or use filters in ways that support genuine self-expression and inclusivity. It’s also helpful to encourage conversations about the impact of filters on body image and self-esteem. As Rettberg (2014) reminds us, filters are both cultural and technological tools that shape our experiences—so let’s make sure we’re shaping them with intention.

References

Barker, J 2020, Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat, Fashion, Style & Popular Culture, vol. 7, no. 2 & 3, pp. 207-221, DOI: 10.1386/fspc_00015_1.

Rettberg, JW 2014, Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, DOI: 10.1057/9781137476661.0004.

Rettberg, JW 2017, ‘Biometric Citizens: Adapting Our Selfies to Machine Vision’, in Selfie Citizenship, ed. Kuntsman, A., Springer, Cham, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-45270-8_10.