102090508dc

[102090508dc]

WEEK 10: Gaming Communities, Social Gaming and Live Streaming

Television was one of the first mediums through which viewers could watch events and shows, live. The invention of the TV brought families together, and began to shape people's ideas about politics, ideology, and socialisation (Taylor, TL). With the popularisation of live-streaming, this form of live media was taken to a whole new level.

Live-streaming is a popular form of online content, which is broadcast live to an audience. Streamers typically appear on social media platforms like Twitch, YouNow, or Youtube, and have been a hotspot for the online gaming community (Taylor, TL). Video game streaming brings together a lot of interactive components. It is a meeting of  “televisual, computer games, the internet, and computer-mediated communication.” concepts - which provide an engaging and interactive experience (Taylor, TL). 

Twitch is the biggest, and most well known platforms for live-streaming. The platform started off small, until a handful of creators took the time to dramatically reshape the landscape. Live-streamers began to build up their audiences, brands, and incomes by streaming from the comfort of their own homes (Taylor, TL). In 2017, Twitch boasted 2.2 million broadcasters per month, and about 10 million daily active users (Taylor, TL). 

Platformitisation refers to the increasing domination of large companies on social media platforms - who are then able to direct the values and experiences of the sites, the content consumed, and the behaviours which are tolerated (Chia, A, Keogh, B, Leorke, D, Nicoll , B).  As online disputes occur more frequently with the clashing of ideals and behviours of users,the contractual terms of service that drive platformitisation become problematic, as they do not typically address community expectations or desires, and infrequently resolve the disputes that they encounter (Chia, A, Keogh, B, Leorke, D, Nicoll , B). 

This is an increasingly complex issues, as participants' desires and interests must continue to be met, while also maintaining a successful business structure. This becomes a hard thing to achieve as a large part of the appeal of live-streaming and online spaces is that they can be autonomous environments with rules that don't necessarily mirror offline forms (Chia, A, Keogh, B, Leorke, D, Nicoll , B) 

Chia, A, Keogh, B, Leorke, D, Nicoll , B, "Platformisation in game development", Internet Policy Review 9, Vol. 4, DOI: 10.14763/2020.4.1515, 2020

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

[102090508dc]

WEEK 9: Digital Citizenship and Software literacy, Instagram Filters

Digitized Dysmorphia is a form of body dysmorphia which stems from the influx of digitally altered images online (Coy-Dibley, I).

As mentioned in my previous discussion on body modification, women's bodies online are constantly sexualised in order to create a profit for social media companies. As young women are bombarded with highly airbrushed and altered images of “hot” women, their sense of self and self-image is eroded (Carah, N, Dobson, A). Western imperialism and colonial perspectives drive the ideals of women online and in the real world, promoting paler skin, sexual purity, and submission (Carah, N, Dobson, A) .

Digitised Dysmorphia is shaped by these societal pressures and norms. Free access to editing software allows users to achieve digitally what they would not otherwise be able to achieve in the physical world (Coy-Dibley, I). Video and image editing apps market themselves to young women, with apps like Facetune, Skinny Camera, and Perfect365 promoting their ability to make users appear thinner, adhere to standard beauty norms, and attract men (Coy-Dibley, I). 

Filters greatly impact what social media users experience on platforms. Users can filter themselves through the use of visual filters and can choose to filter out certain themes, other users, and unwanted content - ultimately tailoring their use of the app to their desires (Rettberg J.W). While this is the popular draw in of many social media platforms - it also presenta a major issue. Content can be easily distorted, presented without important context, or can be culturally and cognitively shaped by a user's ideals (Rettberg J.W). 

Snapchat is one of the social media platforms that popularised live face filters in 2015. They were an immediate success, but as imagined, brought trouble. Snapchats filters often lighten users skin, thin their faces and noses, and distort the users image so that it adheres to western colonial ideals (Barker, J). This readily available form of self-distortion inevitably impacts the user's sense of self, resulting in a heightened self-consciousness and obsession with attaining an unattainable ideal (Coy-Dibley, I). 

Barker, J, ‘Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat’,  Fashion, Style & Popular Culture. Vol 7, pg 207-221, 2020 10.1386/fspc_00015_1.

Carah, N, Dobson, A,  'Algorithmic Hotness: Young Women’s “Promotion and “Reconnaissance” Work via Social Media Body Images, Social Media + Society, 2016

Coy-Dibley, I, ‘Digitsed Dysmorphia of the Female Body : The Re/Disfigurement of the Image’,  Palgrave Communications, 2016 2:16040 doi: 10.1057/palcomms.2016.40

Rettberg J.W, 'Filtered Reality'. In: Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves, Palgrave Macmillan, 2014 https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137476661_2

[102090508dc]

WEEK 8: Body Modification on Social Media

Social media is the new forefront for body modification. Plastic surgeons have flocked to platforms like Instagram, Facebook and Youtube to promote their businesses, and harvest the increased desire from (mostly female) users to modify their bodies to meet an unrealistic and everchanging online ideal (Dorfman, R, Vaca, E, Mahmood, E,  Fine, N,  Schierle, C). Studies from the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery have revealed that 42% of surgeons report that their patients are seeking aesthetic changes to improve their appearance on Instagram, Snapchat, and Facebook (Dorfman, R, Vaca, E, Mahmood, E,  Fine, N,  Schierle, C).

Instagram and Twitter have the most online traffic regarding Plastic Surgery. Instagram reports a high number of monthly users, and has a large number of online advertisers that harness the aesthetic impact of Instagram - even higher than Twitter. Instagram also boasts the highest number of licensed physicians using their plastic surgery related hashtags (Dorfman, R, Vaca, E, Mahmood, E,  Fine, N,  Schierle, C).

While it is important to have this information coming from licensed physicians, it also brings new challenges from the impact that social media is having in shaping the Plastic Surgery industry. 

Human judgement is integral to our survival, but our critical judgments of others bodies online can often create hostile environments that negatively impact the behaviours and sense-of-self for other users, and often for the user themself (Carah, N, Dobson, A). Social media platforms thrive and function off of this critical judgement, as it is vital to algorithmic platforms that aim to profit from “calculative judgements about the affective dimensions of human life” (Carah, N, Dobson, A). 

We can see this clearly with the curating of “hot” bodies, which are used in advertising across all social media platforms (Carah, N, Dobson, A). ‘Hot’ female bodies, which have been heavily edited, airbrushed, and staged, bring online attention and enable social media sites to have more traffic. These platforms make a profit off the sexualisation of a human body - thus impacting the algorithmic information that is stored in their databases. More people are interested in ‘hot’ bodies - so they will be shown more ‘hot’ bodies (Carah, N, Dobson, A). Effectively turning users' intense criticism against themselves and others into profit. 

These sexualised images are a reflection of the wider Western ideals we have for women, who are only seen as valuable, if they are ‘fuckable’ (Drenten et al). Online, there are different forms of what is ‘sexy’ - but all of these forms of online attention invites harassment. There is no safe way for women to participate online. It does not matter if they are sexualised to the extreme, or completely hidden, existing in a public space as a woman is increasingly violent. This sexualised infiltration of social media platforms has turned many unwilling female users into partial sexual labourers - who promote images online which cater to male sexuality, sexual desire, and sexual pleasure (Drenten et al). It is no wonder that so many turn to plastic surgery to cater to the male gaze and in an attempt to minimise harrassment online. 

Carah, N, Dobson, A,  'Algorithmic Hotness: Young Women’s “Promotion and “Reconnaissance” Work via Social Media Body Images, Social Media + Society, 2016

Drenten et al, ‘Sexualised labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention’ , Gender, Work and Organisation, 2018

Dorfman, R, Vaca, E, Mahmood, E,  Fine, N,  Schierle, C,  ‘Plastic Surgery-Related Hashtag Utilization on Instagram: Implications for Education and Marketing’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, Vol. 38, Issue 3, pg 332–338, 2018

[102090508dc]

WEEK 7 : Digital Citizenship & Conflict : Social Media Governance

With digital citizenship - comes great responsibility. As violence against women becomes more visible (largely thanks to the internet), so do the methods through which this violence is achieved. “Gaslighting” is one of the most insidious of these methods. 

Gaslighting is a new term for a relatively old human behaviour - it involves denying the reality of another person's experience through psychological manipulation to erode their sense of self (Gleeson, J). This behaviour isn’t always deliberate, but is usually a method of maintaining power and control over someone else. When this behaviour is deliberate - it is usually intensely coordinated and organised by online groups that want to continue the perpetration of men’s rights and anti-feminism through mysogyny and harassment (Gleeson, J) 

Gaslighting is recognised as a technique of abuse by the Domestic Violence Resource Centre of Victoria, and SafeSteps - and the impact of this behaviour can be felt by survivors who stand up against this abuse who are often told “the are imagining it” or that they’re over-exaggerating their experience (Gleeson, J).

Technology has both helped to bring awareness to this issue and made the issue worse. As technology and social media use has increased, so have instances of online abuse, sexual harassment, the spreading of pornographic imaes, death threats, and impersonation (Marwick, A, Caplan, R). While online discussion frames harassment as an abhorrent behaviour, many social media platforms thrive off and support the systematic harrassment against women online (Marwick, A, Caplan, R)

Social media platforms do not do enough to protect victims of this sort of harassment (Marwick, A, Caplan, R) Typically these platforms have report or blocking features - but users can easily create new accounts, and the harassment can continue (Marwick, A, Caplan, A). Online abuse is about silencing young girls and women. This is becoming a massive issue for young women - as with the COVID-19 pandemic, more of us are staying home, more children are exposed to the internet at younger ages, without supervision,  for longer periods of time (Plan International).

More than half of the girl surveyed for the “Free to be online” survey have experienced sexual harassment online, leaving one quarter of them feeling physically unsafe as a result (Plan International). 

A vital tool in the fight against online harassment is education. Educational institutes should encourage young people to learn the skills and knowledge needed to be inclusive, empathetic citizens - in all spheres of life (Heath, M.K). This includes the digital sphere. 

By raising a generation of digital citizens that have the tools to interact with and influence the social sphere, it will shape behaviour online, and foster a more empathetic, inclusive online experience (Heath, M.K).

Bibliography:

Gleeson, J, 'What does Gaslighting Mean?' The Conversation, 2018, https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-gaslighting-mean-107888

Heath, M.K, ‘What kind of (digital) citizen? A between-studies analysis of research and teaching for democracy’, International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, Vol. 35 No. 5, pp. 342-356, 2018

Marwick, A, Caplan, R, 'Drinking male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment' , Feminist Media Studies Vol. 18, Issue 4, pg 543-559, 2018

Plan International, ‘Free to be online? Girls and young women’s experiences of online harassment’, Get Girls Equal, Plan International, 2020

[102090508dc]

WEEK 6 : What is digital citizenship? Hashtag publics, political engagement and activism

SHEIN is a ultra-fast fashion website which has garnered popular support online. SHEIN is unique in that it functions purely online, without any physical stores for consumers to visit (DW Planet A, 2022). Younger women are the audience, with its social media strategy being centred around consumer marketing. Influencers and typical users participate in trends that promote the brand for them, with algorithms presenting trends to younger women that play on their desire to fit in and conform to social norms (DW Planet A, 2022). The popularity of the site contradicts the values of Gen Z - who largely exist online - as it produces mass ammounts of unsustainable fashion, and contributes to the growing environmental impact of fast fashion (Elan, P., 2021). 

The emergence of sustainable fashion has been fueled by concern for the environmental, social, and economic impact of the practice (Lai, Z., Henninger, C., Alevizou, P., 2017). Sustainable fashion refers to clothing goods which sustain the wearers basic needs and quality of life while limiting the use of natural resources in its creation. Fast-fashion on the other hand refers to the mass-produced, cheap, and quickly out-of-style clothing items which popular companies often produce (Lai, Z., Henninger, C., Alevizou, P., 2017). The fashion industry is one of the biggest polluters globally, and is a huge cause for concern (Lai, Z., Henninger, C., Alevizou, P., 2017). 

The sustainable fashion movement is commonly thought of as the antidote to the fast-fashion crisis (Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., Wang, Y., 2021). The online movement aims to influence attitudes towards fashion, centering sustainability, function, and comfort over what is ‘trendy’ (Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., Wang, Y., 2021). Shaping consumers' attitudes is achieved through social media campaigns which present exciting alternatives to fast fashion. The trend has become so popular that many popular brands have jumped on the bandwagon - producing clothing that capitalises on this business model (Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., Wang, Y., 2021). Despite the rising popularity of slow fashion, the U.S continues to produce 16 million tons of textile and apparel waste - most of which ends up in landfills (Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., Wang, Y., 2021)

Bibliography

Lai, Z., Henninger, C., Alevizou, P., 2017 ‘An Exploration of Consumers’ Perceptions Towards Sustainable Fashion – A Qualitative Study in the UK’, in Sustainability in Fashion A Cradle to Upcycle Approach, Palgrave

Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., Wang, Y., 2021, ‘A study of U.S consumers’ intention to purchase slow fashion apparel: understanding the key determinants’, International Jounral of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Edition 14

DW Planet A, 2022, ‘If you think fast fashion is bad, check out SHEIN’

Elan, P., 2021, ‘Worst of the worst, why is fast fashion retailer SHEIN launching a reality show?’, The Guardian Sun

[102090508dc]

WEEK 5 : WHAT IS DIGITAL CITIZENSHIP?

Social media has become a generation's medium for public discussion, for creative freedom and political engagement. The 2010’s issued in a new era - ‘the era of social media’ (Enli, G., 2017). With this new era brought new social constructs, and new rules to follow. The concept of digital citizenship has flourished in this Internet age. Digital Citizenship refers to the interpersonal citizen participation that occurs in digital spaces (Vromen, A., 2017). Networking, interactive online conversations, and sharing of information via social media are all functions of effective digital citizenship, and allow for political engagement (Vromen, A., 2017). 

Political engagement via social media has changed over time. The 2015-2016 election period was a pivotal point in time for the evolution of social media (Nelimarkka, M., Laaksonen, S., Tuokko, M., Valkonen, T). Facebook and Twitter became major sources of information, and were instrumental in the success of political campaigns. 

Facebook quickly became the place for formal campaigning, whereas Twitter became the place for users to find information and share concerns. As different social media platforms become vessels for different forms of communication, the discourse that plays out becomes platform-specific and limited by brand identity, user expectations, and the functional limitations of the chosen platform (Chia, A., Keogh, B., Leorke, D., Nicoll, B., 2020). The election cycles of the 2010’s quickly developed Facebook as the place for socio-emotional displays and the marketing of political ideas through the lens of true ‘authenticity’ and the validation of a blue tick (Nelimarkka, M., Laaksonen, S., Tuokko, M., Valkonen, T., 2020).

This was demonstrated perfectly in the 2016 United States elections - which saw millions of users flocking to social media to find political information, and interact with politicians directly rather than through traditional media (Enli, G., 2017). Both presidential candidates used social media to connect with voters. Hilary Clinton even announced that she was running for President via twitter (Enli, G., 2017). Donald Trump's electoral success was a result of his ameteur-esque authenticity, as well as his critique of the bias in traditional news sources. His Presidential win heralded a new era of de-professionalism that is still a major part of successful political campaigns today (Enli, G., 2017). 

Platformitisation like this, often results in us overlooking independent, entrepreneurial, fringe communities for the comfort of the constraints of singular platforms (Chia, A., Keogh, B., Leorke, D., Nicoll, B., 2020). This extends to our discussions of politics, and political campaigns on social media which can exploit the social rules of certain platforms to garner support from constituents. 

Despite this challenge to democracy, some political organisations have taken to social media to connect more authentically with constituents and translate those connections into real political change (GetUp!, 2017). GetUp! Ran multiple successful political campaigns in 2017 in response to the same-sex plebiscite, robodebt threats, and climate change. Get Up! harnessed the political and social scope of social media to engage with the Australian public through online organising and storytelling (GetUp!, 2017) to mobilise digital citizens. 

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

Enli, G., 2017, 'Twitter as an arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 presidential election', European Journal of Communication, vol 32, no 1 pp 50-61

GetUp!, ‘2017: The year people took back politics, GetUp!', https://youtu.be/7a1hUY53sOQ

Nelimarkka, M., Laaksonen, S., Tuokko, M., Valkonen, T., 2020, ‘Platformed Interactions: ‘How Social Media Platforms Relate to Candidate–Constituent Interaction During Finnish 2015 Election Campaigning’, Social Media + Society, Pages 1–17

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

[102090508dc]

WEEK 4 : DIGITAL COMMUNITY AND FANDOM

We don’t often talk about reality TV as the most intellectual form of entertainment, and yet discourse surrounding this popular medium often turns political. Fans swarm to social media to discuss the contents of the latest episodes, using platforms to express their perceptions of the stars' behaviours and discuss the context of the larger political landscape (Graham, T., Hajru, A., 2011). Social media commentary is used as a vessel for public deliberation, for the proliferation of ideas, and the establishment of social boundaries (Graham, T., Harju, A., 2011).

The over-consumption, and over-saturation of Reality TV has contributed to the medium's evolution (Kavka, M., 2018). Stars are always camera-ready, and over-perform or over-dramatise their reactions to appease the audience. Many reality shows are scripted and follow repetitive formats, and can be even further distorted by post-production editing (Kavka, M., 2018). Users also have the ability to interact directly with reality stars, and can provide instantaneous feedback about their appearance, mannerisms, personality and politics (Graham, T., Harju, A. 2011),. 

Reality TV is when the private becomes personal, and social media takes this to a whole other level. Audiences take to social media to engage with other people over shared issues of concern, and participate in public discussion (Graham, T., Harju, A, 2011). While this is an incredibly important facet of a democratically functioning system, the deeply personal nature of discussions around Reality TV and the stars involved can further solidify social hierarchies and continue the oppression of certain peoples (Arcy, J., 2018). Female reality stars have to contend with the harsh demands of the entertainment industry, while also balancing the hyper-critical nature of social media forums - both of which facilitate gendered violence and abuse (Arcy, J., 2018).

Tumblr is home to mass fandom pages that demonstrate the possibility of creatively and politically building upon a body of work, and reality tv like Rupaul's Drag Race is a great example of this. Typically, reality shows are not inherently political - instead they focus on interpersonal conflicts and challenges faced by stars. While RuPual’s Drag Race also does this, the show has become a queer landmark in which stars openly discuss gender, sexuality, and the queer experience (Brennan, N., Gudelunas, D., 2017). The show took off on social media and has since impacted popular slang, and empowered the queer community by showcasing their stories and experiences (Brennan, N., Gudelunas, D., 2017). 

Bibliography

Arcy, J., 2018, ‘The digital money shot: Twitter wars, The Real Housewives, and transmedia storytelling’, Celebrity Studies, Edition 9, Pages 487-502

Brennan, N., Gudelunas, D., 2017,  ‘Drag Culture, Global Participation and RuPaul’s Drag Race’, into to RuPaul’s Drag Race and the Shifting Visibility of Drag Culture: The Boundaries of Reality TV, Palgrave Macmillan

Graham, T., Hajru, A., 2011, ‘Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere’, European Journal of Communication, Edition 26, Pages 18-32

Kavka, M., 2018, ‘Reality TV : Its contents and discontents’, Critical Quarterly, Edition 60, Pages 5-18

[102090508dc]

WEEK 3 : DIGITAL COMMUNITY AND BLOGGING

2015Tumblr touts itself as the ultimate egalitarian social media platform. Users can anonymously connect with other users over their shared interests, follower counts are hidden, and the highly sought after ‘blue-tick’ of verification that can be found all over Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook is not a staple of the platform (McCracken, A 2020). The anonymity of Tumblr means that users can explore their interests without fear of judgement, and (in theory) can connect more deeply with other people that share these interests. While this is largely the selling point of Tumblr - it also very quickly became the reason for its downfall. 

We all know that different online platforms facilitate different opportunities and experiences. When you open up Facebook, you have a whole set of expectations and rules that are part of the functioning of the platform than you do for Twitter. A young woman who started the #CropTopDay tag on Twitter to express her frustration with sexist dress codes, perfectly demonstrates the limits of certain social media platforms. Most users “feel more comfortable [sharing] things that are of a … controversial nature on Twitter [more] than [they] do on Facebook” (Kellar, J 2019). Several academic studies back up this phenomenon, finding that younger audiences tend to use platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, and Whisper over Facebook - largely because the platforms facilitate more distinct opportunities for engagement (Kellar, J 2019).

Different social media platforms create very distinct digital societies - where different social norms and rules are enforced through use. In general, we perceive social media as a space where we have equal access to information, and can contribute equally to dialectical discourse (Kruse, L., Norris, D., Flinchum, J., 2018). Tumblr markets itself as a place which empowers marginalised people to find their community and build a world free from the constraints of traditional social norms (McCracken, A 2020). Despite this, Tumblr’s anonymity doesn’t protect it from institutional influence (Kruse, L., Norris, D., Flinchum, J., 2018). Instead, it can magnify existing social hierarchies and allow for niche communities to form. 

(image source : Stern, C, 2015, ‘Student, 18, organizes campaign against her school's 'sexist' dress code by asking girls to wear midriff-baring crop tops in protest against the 'sexualization of women', Daily Mail)

This played out in the queer community, who intitally flocked to Tumblr because of the apparent freedom to share information, and express oneself fully. While Tumblr certainly served as a space for queer users to build communities and learn more about gender and sexuality, these connections were often short-lived and anonymous, and further entrenched social stereotypes which isolated users who did not confom to specific subcultures (Byron, P., Brady Robards, B., Hanckel, S., Vivienne, B, Churchill, 2019). 

Bibliography

Byron, P., Brady Robards, B., Hanckel, S., Vivienne, B, Churchill, 2019, ‘Hey I’m having these experiences : Tumblr use and young people’s queer (dis)connections’, International Journal of Commnunication, Edition 13, Pages 2239-2259

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

Kruse, L., Norris, D., Flinchum, J., 2018, ‘Social media as a public sphere? Politics on social media’, The Sociological Quarterly, Edition 59, Pages 62-84

McCracken, A., 2020, ‘Chapter 3 : Going Down the Rabbit Hole: An Interview with Amanda Brennan, Head of Content Insights and Social, Tumblr’, Tumblr Book: Platform and cultures, University of Michigan Press